U.S. Department of State's Blog, page 2

November 1, 2018

Department Press Briefings : Department Press Briefing - November 1, 2018

Robert Palladino





Deputy Spokesperson


Department Press Briefing





Washington, DC




November 1, 2018
Index for Today's Briefing

RUSSIA



CUBA



BRAZIL



MEXICO



NORTH KOREA



ISRAEL/PALESTINIANS



SYRIA



IRAN



CHINA



RUSSIA



TURKEY



SAUDI ARABIA



BURMA



YEMEN


TRANSCRIPT:





Today's briefing was held off-camera, so no video is available.






2:24 p.m. EDT




MR PALLADINO: One for the top. Today in Vienna, at the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the United States joined a coalition of 16 countries invoking the Moscow Mechanism, a rare diplomatic action reserved for serious human rights concerns. This action triggers a formal international fact-finding mission to look into reports of impunity for human rights violations and abuses in the Russian Federation’s Republic of Chechnya.




The United States and other OSCE countries repeatedly have pressed the Russian Federation to investigate disturbing reports of extrajudicial killings, torture, arbitrary detentions, and other violations and abuses in Chechnya. These violations and abuses targeted members of the LGBTI community, members of human rights, nongovernmental organizations, and those the Chechen regime labeled, quote-unquote, “terrorists.”




We and likeminded countries have demanded that Moscow hold accountable those responsible for such violations and abuses. Russia has failed to provide a substantive response to repeated expressions of international concern and calls for accountability. Therefore, with these actions at the OSCE, the administration will continue to work with our European partners to expose Russia’s human rights violations and abuses.




With that, I’d be happy to take some questions.




QUESTION: Thanks, Robert. This is actually serious, though: Where is Heather? Is she in the building?




MR PALLADINO: Heather is in the building, hard at work.




QUESTION: Is she in New York, measuring curtains? (Laughter.)




MR PALLADINO: Heather is at work today, hard at work.




QUESTION: Okay. But she’s not down here. She hasn’t graced us with her presence in some time.




MR PALLADINO: Yes. If you may have noticed, Matt, we have a deputy spokesperson now.




QUESTION: Yes.




MR PALLADINO: And that would be me. And Heather --




QUESTION: Okay. Well, you’re welcome to be here too.




MR PALLADINO: Excellent. Thank you, Matt.




QUESTION: I’m just glad that there is a body up there. Okay. With that out of the way --




QUESTION: But can we maybe – Matt --




QUESTION: Sure.




QUESTION: Let’s just ask about – I mean, there’s reports that she is – has she accepted a job – the job as UN ambassador?




MR PALLADINO: That – any – I’ve seen that report. And any announcement like that, of course, is the prerogative of the White House, and that’s the President’s decision to make.




QUESTION: Would it be a job that she’s interested in?




MR PALLADINO: I have absolutely no information in that regard. What I would say, though, is she’s a fantastic boss.




QUESTION: How many off-camera practice sessions you have been given to? (Laughter.)




MR PALLADINO: This will be my fifth. This will be my fifth. Please.




QUESTION: Yeah. Into a little bit of substance – just a little bit.




MR PALLADINO: Yeah. Good.




QUESTION: Today Ambassador Bolton down at Miami made a speech in which he lashed out or criticized what he called the “Troika of Tyranny.” And I want to ask a couple things about that. One is who came up with this “Troika of Tyranny” thing? I mean --




MR PALLADINO: These were the national security advisor’s remarks, and I would have to refer you to the national security advisor on his remarks.




QUESTION: But I mean, it seems like too cute by half. “Trinity of Totalitarianism” and “Trio of Terrorism” and all those kind of – I mean, it just seems a little odd. But anyway, the speech in fact was serious, even if that line wasn’t. And he went after Cuba, announced new sanctions.




But at the same time as he was giving his speech down in Miami, in New York the General Assembly was voting on the annual resolution that Cuba brings every year that condemns the embargo. Yesterday Ambassador Haley had challenged or had posed the question: Who will vote with us? And today the answer came back: two. Only – well, only one country voted with you – Israel. A hundred and eighty-nine countries voted against; the United States and Israel were alone. And – sorry – 189 countries voted in favor, and the United States and Israel vote – were the only two that voted against the resolution.




And – so I want to know, this is the same thing that happened last year, what does this tell you about your policy toward Cuba?




MR PALLADINO: We are – our policy towards Cuba – the ambassador – Ambassador Bolton today laid out our policy towards Cuba pretty clearly. That came out not long ago. And these countries are repressive, and the United States is going to stand firmly against them.




QUESTION: Well, I’m sorry, but what does it mean – what does it tell you, for a second year in a row, the second time the administration has gone through this exercise at the UN General Assembly, and literally the entire rest of the world, with the exception of Israel, votes against you. Do you not see that – or can you not accept that other countries have a problem with the policy?




MR PALLADINO: We’re committed to the people of the countries that are repressed in our hemisphere, and the suffering of the Cuban people, along with the Venezuelans and the Nicaraguans, is something that the United States is going to continue to stand up for and speak out for. And so we’re – that’s our policy. We’re going to continue to pursue that.




QUESTION: So this vote, this annual vote, is just irrelevant to you? You don’t think that it means anything? You don’t – you’re not willing to take any lesson or anything from the fact that every other single country in the world, with the exception of one, disagrees with you?




MR PALLADINO: We’re going to continue to speak full-throatedly, forthrightly for the freedom of people in our hemisphere. It doesn’t – we’re going to stand up for that, and I don't have much further. Yeah.




QUESTION: You can do all that – but you can do all that without the embargo, can’t you?




MR PALLADINO: We are going to maintain pressure on this regime until we’re able to see progress for the Cuban people.




QUESTION: On the same subject, the election of Bolsonaro was seen as somewhat controversial and pretty divisive there. The comments he’s made have been homophobic, misogynist, racist. But the national security advisor said that his election is a positive sign for the region. Does the State Department agree with that, and if so, why?




MR PALLADINO: The President and the Secretary of State have both had good calls with the president-elect, and we look forward to working with his administration, and we’re confident in Brazil’s democracy and the choice of the Brazilian people.




Yeah. Next question?




QUESTION: Does --




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go to Francesco.




QUESTION: Does the Secretary and the State Department also think that Bolsonaro is a likeminded leader, the same kind of policies coming from him and the United States?




MR PALLADINO: We look forward to working with the president-elect and having a close and constructive relationship with Brazil.




QUESTION: Well, is the State Department somewhat disturbed by some of these comments that he’s made?




MR PALLADINO: We’re – we are – we take Brazil’s commitment to democracy and human rights, and that’s something that we’re going to continue to engage on and work closely with Brazil.




Yes. Let’s go – any more on the Western Hemisphere?




QUESTION: Well, actually, yeah, someone --




MR PALLADINO: All right.




QUESTION: Does the State Department agree with the opinion expressed by others in the administration that these caravans, plural or singular, represents an invasion of the United States?




MR PALLADINO: We’re – our position – we’re in close contact with Mexico and Central America. I mean, the Secretary of State had a call just yesterday with the foreign minister, and we’re working – of Mexico. We remain in close contact, and we are – we welcome the efforts that the Government of Mexico is taking in their plan to work with the UN High Commissioner on Refugees. They’re building up an existing program to address this situation. And we support their work and we stand ready to assist both the Government of Mexico and the United Nations High Commissioner of Refugees to address this concern. And I’ll leave it at that.




QUESTION: What’s the concern? The concern is that it’s an invasion from the State Department’s point of view, or that these people represent a threat? Is that --




MR PALLADINO: We are – we encourage all countries in the region to support safe, orderly, and legal immigration. The movements of people between and across countries’ borders must be in accordance with the law, and I’ll leave it at that.




Any more Western Hemisphere? Let’s go to North Korea.




QUESTION: Thank you very much. Forgive me my voice, because I’ve been to dentist today, so I cannot much talk.




MR PALLADINO: It sounds fine. Please.




QUESTION: Okay. Did the United States allow observator or inspectors to dismantle North Korea’s nuclear site? Is it observations or inspections for the North Korean nuclear site? What is it, because a little bit confused about this, because they already destroyed the Punggye-ri nuclear site. But why they invited right now for the observations for that, or they invite other country too for inspectors? Or what is that?




MR PALLADINO: Okay. I – this is going to be something that will be discussed moving forward – the details of inspectors, the composition and the modalities of the inspection, and I would leave it at that.




QUESTION: What – but --




MR PALLADINO: Any more North Korea?




QUESTION: Did they have --




MR PALLADINO: Any more North Korea?




QUESTION: North Korea.




MR PALLADINO: Francesco.




QUESTION: It’s been more than week and a half since the Secretary said that he will meet – week and a half with some North Korean counterpart. Does that mean that this meeting is canceled or that it’s just postponed, and do you have any date or announcement to make?




MR PALLADINO: He said yesterday that he would be speaking to his counterpart soon – next week, I believe. And so I don’t have any further details to announce today on how – on that, and I’ll leave it at that.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: Sure, Elise. Go ahead.




QUESTION: Okay. The Secretary said he was going to be meeting with his counterpart. That was like – as Francesco said. The South Koreans are saying that he’s going to be meeting with him, and he said he’s going to be speaking with him. So, I mean, isn’t it kind of logical to assume that the North Korean counterpart is coming in the next week or two or in the coming weeks and you just don’t have a date? I mean, why are you parsing as opposed to, like, he’s speaking to him, he’s meeting with him? I mean, he said he was going to be meeting with him, even if a date isn’t scheduled.




MR PALLADINO: Because I have nothing further to announce at this time.




QUESTION: We understand you don’t have a --




MR PALLADINO: And so I think the Secretary’s words speak for themself and I don’t want to get ahead of anything that we have to announce.




QUESTION: Well, he said that he was going to be meeting with him, so should we go with that he said he’s going to be meeting with him or that he said he’s going to be speaking with him? Like, I think there’s a little bit of parsing going on and it’s like a little too cute by half in a sense.




MR PALLADINO: I think a meeting would be a safe conclusion based upon all the things that have been said previously, but I have no further --




QUESTION: And there’s just no specific schedule? It’s not specifically scheduled?




MR PALLADINO: We have nothing to announce at this time, absolutely.




QUESTION: North Korea.




MR PALLADINO: North Korea?




QUESTION: Yes, North Korea.




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go North Korea over there, please.




QUESTION: Thank you. Yesterday Secretary Pompeo in an interview said that inspections in North Korea will be something that he’ll be talking with the North Korean counterpart, right, so is he going into such details as a Secretary of State? Because the working-level meeting that U.S. has requested to North Korea, North Korea has refused to hold that with Representative Biegun. Is this why Secretary Pompeo is going into details of the inspections with his counterpart in a high-level meeting?




MR PALLADINO: I would disagree with the characterization of your question. The Secretary – there’s a lot of things that we are going to be talking about and the Secretary’s going to be talking about. I don’t want to get ahead of the negotiations that the Secretary of State will be involved in, but one of the big things that he’ll be talking about is a – the next summit between the President and Chairman Kim, and that’s something that we previously have talked about and it’s something very much that we look forward to moving ahead on as well.




And separately, Special Representative Biegun has just been to the region, and he remains engaged with his counterparts as well. Our objectives here remain the same, and that’s the final, fully verified denuclearization of North Korea. Nothing has changed in this regard. We continue to move forward and we’re at a good place.




A follow-up, sure. Please, follow up.




QUESTION: One more follow-up. One more follow-up. One more follow-up to that, yes. So is the State Department in discussion with international organizations like IAEA and CTBTO to set up the modality for inspections in North Korea?




MR PALLADINO: I don’t have any information on that from the podium today, yeah.




QUESTION: North Korea.




QUESTION: One more North Korea.




MR PALLADINO: Any more on North Korea?




QUESTION: Way back here --




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go to North Korea over here.




QUESTION: When the Secretary just recently spoke about international inspectors being let into two sites, one of the things that the North Koreans have stated is that that would only happen if there were corresponding measures by the U.S. Can you say whether or not an end of war declaration is among the measures that the U.S. is still considering in this upcoming meeting?




MR PALLADINO: Yeah, I’m not going to get ahead of any future negotiations. There’s still a lot of work to be done, and as the President and the Secretary of State both have said, our eyes are wide open, and we continue to work towards this.




QUESTION: When he said they committed, though, to allowing inspectors into those two sites, from what we’ve seen, they’ve committed as long as the U.S. is taking corresponding measures. So has the U.S. agreed to do anything to – as a corresponding measure in order to allow that to happen?




MR PALLADINO: I’m not going to get ahead of any negotiations that are going to be going forward.




On North Korea? Any more on North Korea?




QUESTION: South Korea.




QUESTION: Way in the back there is, Robert.




MR PALLADINO: All right, let’s go to North Korea in the back.




QUESTION: Thank you. So, when Pompeo last visited North Korea, he had talked about accelerating the working level progress. So, wondering if there are plans for Steve Biegun to finally meet with his North Korean counterpart, and when the working level negotiations for the upcoming summit are expected to begin.




MR PALLADINO: I don’t have any announcements on the special representative’s meetings at this time.




Next subject, let’s go to Said.




QUESTION: Robert, Robert --




MR PALLADINO: Said.




QUESTION: All right. Thank you, Robert.




QUESTION: Can we stay on South Korea?




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go to Said. We can come back to South Korea.




QUESTION: Thank you. Last Sunday, the Israelis killed three Palestinian boys in Gaza, and yesterday they said it was a mistake because they were doing suspicious activities and so on. Shouldn’t this stop? I mean, this has been going on now day after day, the Israelis doing this to suspicious activities. They deem all activities by Palestinians on their side as suspicious. Shouldn’t this be outrageous? I think you would be outraged if this happened elsewhere.




MR PALLADINO: Well, I guess as a parent – this is a pretty dangerous place. And as a parent I might – I guess I would say that there’s really no justification for the recklessness and cynicism that Hamas has shown in urging people to engage in violence that exposes them to this terrible risk. And --




QUESTION: But these boys were not part of any demonstrations. They were playing. They were playing last Sunday. They were playing on their side, and they were targeted because the Israelis thought they were doing something suspicious. Should that excessive --




MR PALLADINO: Israel --




QUESTION: Let me ask you this directly. Should the excessive use of force that the Israelis do day after day, should they reduce that level of excessive force?




MR PALLADINO: Israel has a right to defend itself, and Hamas continues to drive peace further away and cause more suffering.




QUESTION: What’s the meaning – I mean, you started that --




QUESTION: And how is that related to the two kids that were playing? I don’t quite make a connection – playing children, Hamas.




QUESTION: And I don’t get how you – why would you even say “as a parent.” Are you somehow holding the parents of these --




MR PALLADINO: No. I’m saying --




QUESTION: -- kids responsible for allowing their children to play?




MR PALLADINO: I’m saying this is an extremely dangerous situation, and to allow teenagers into this area strikes – that is the heightened – that is cynicism at its – in its height.




QUESTION: So it’s the parents – their parents’ fault, that the Israelis shot them?




MR PALLADINO: We would call on Hamas to put the welfare and safety of the people of Gaza --




QUESTION: But you said specifically in your answer – you said “as a parent.” So I want to know what it is that you have against these Palestinian parents.




MR PALLADINO: This is a dangerous situation, and there really can be no justification for urging people, allowing people, to engage in violence in these areas that exposes them to such terrible risk.




QUESTION: But is there – but there is justification?




MR PALLADINO: This is dangerous. It exposes them to risk.




QUESTION: So – but there is justification? You can find someplace that there is justification for shooting children who are playing?




MR PALLADINO: Israel has a right to defend itself. And this is a dangerous situation. And for further --




QUESTION: Let me just follow up. One question. One. One more question.




MR PALLADINO: Fine.




QUESTION: Tomorrow marks the 101st anniversary of the Balfour Declaration, and the Palestinians have been for the past 101 year under occupation, military occupation, and so on. Isn’t it time for them to get independence, maybe with your help? I mean, you’re always championing human rights and independence and the right to sovereignty, and so on.




MR PALLADINO: We’re looking – there is a – obviously, at the appropriate time, this administration will be releasing a peace plan, and we hope that the people will judge this plan by its merits. The Palestinian people deserve leadership that will give them a chance for a way forward to end this conflict.




And I’ll move on. Let’s go on.




QUESTION: Syria?




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: Laurie. Laurie.




QUESTION: Yeah. How do you see the overall political situation in Syria now? On Saturday Turkey hosted a summit that included Russia, Germany, and France. Is there a reason you weren’t there? And what’s your view of the results of that summit?




MR PALLADINO: Our view of the results of that summit are we welcome the endorsement that occurred there regarding the Idlib deconfliction agreement between Turkey and Russia. And I’d say further about that meeting we are encouraged, frankly, on the specific commitment to launch the constitutional committee by the end of the year. And we will continue to consult with those that were present at that meeting to ensure that we continue in that regard.




As far as our coordination goes, we supported the four-party summit. We supported this, and we consulted extensively with the representatives of all four participants prior to it taking place. In the end, the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2254 is what we advocate and what we want everyone behind. This meeting helps us drive towards that as well, so we would welcome that. And our engagement on the issue certainly continues. Ambassador Jeffrey’s – was, is in the region – or he’s in Europe currently. He just participated in a small group meeting this past Monday, and that’s just an example of our engagement. And we’ll continue to push forward on that.




QUESTION: And if I could ask you a follow-up question on --




MR PALLADINO: Sure.




QUESTION: -- what Secretary Pompeo said in his interview with Tony Katz today. He mentioned Turkey; we’re working together to deny terrorist safe haven, terrorists who have, in fact, plotted to attack U.S. civil aviation. Could you explain what plot that was to attack U.S. civil aviation?




MR PALLADINO: I haven’t heard the interview and I don’t have any further information on that, Laurie, right now. Sorry about that.




QUESTION: China?




QUESTION: South Korea?




QUESTION: Russia?




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go to South Korea. I promised South Korea. Let’s go.




QUESTION: Can you confirm reports, both from Seoul and New Delhi, that the U.S. is giving a waiver for oil imports from Iran to South Korea and India?




MR PALLADINO: The United States is in the midst of an internal process to consider significant reduction exceptions for individual countries, but that is only on a case-by-case basis. We have – we continue to discuss our Iran policy with our counterparts around the world and the implications of our re-imposition of sanctions previously lifted or waivered under the JCPOA.




QUESTION: Robert --




QUESTION: China?




QUESTION: Robert, on Iran?




MR PALLADINO: On Iran? Let’s go – Iran in the front.




QUESTION: Robert, can you say as the administration goes through that process and is set to re-impose the JCPOA sanctions that the regime that will be in place will be at least as strong as the one that was lifted in 2015?




MR PALLADINO: We’re quite confident moving forward. And then we’re – if we look at what’s already taken place, we see businesses making business decisions and leaving Iran. We’re tracking around 100 major companies that have already made their business decisions to leave Iran and choose business with the United States over business with Iran. We are going to continue to push forward and we’re quite confident.




QUESTION: There are some – on the enforcement side, though – on the enforcement side, though, there are some concerns. We talked about the waivers that you say you’re looking at a case-by-case basis, but also when it comes to processing transactions through SWIFT, that perhaps the enforcement regime won’t be as strong as it was years ago.




MR PALLADINO: For any questions on SWIFT, I’d have to refer to the Department of Treasury. We are – we’re quite confident moving forward that the actions that are being taken are going to help us exert maximum pressure against the Iranian regime and this leading state sponsor of terrorism is going to see revenues cut off significantly that will deprive it of its ability to fund terrorism throughout the region.




QUESTION: Robert --




QUESTION: China?




QUESTION: On Russia?




QUESTION: On Iran?




MR PALLADINO: Stay on Iran, please. Lesley.




QUESTION: Are there any countries that have actually gone down to zero on oil imports from Iran as you’re moving into the sanctions?




MR PALLADINO: Lesley, I don’t have that level of detail to speak to here at the podium today. Sorry. Anymore Iran?




QUESTION: Yeah.




QUESTION: China?




QUESTION: Russia?




MR PALLADINO: Iran?




QUESTION: Yes.




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go – Michele.




QUESTION: Thank you. The State Department’s Twitter feed and social media has been focusing a lot on human rights abuses and corruption in Iran in recent weeks and days, and I wonder if that’s meant to encourage protesters to rise up, to make sure that Iranians don’t blame the U.S. for economic hardships once the economic sanctions goes in. Can you just describe a little bit about what you’re trying to do there?




MR PALLADINO: What I would say is the Iranian people are the ones who have suffered greatly thanks to the misuse of funds by the Iranian regime to fund proxies and malign activities across the globe. I would say the United States has at its disposal diplomatic information and economic avenues, and from the State Department that’s something that we – we look at the realm of what we can accomplish and something that we pursue.




QUESTION: Wait, what does that – what does that mean?




QUESTION: Iran?




MR PALLADINO: Yep. Let’s go – Nick.




QUESTION: So just, right off bat, if the U.S. believes that Iranian human rights negative actions have increased under this policy by this administration, is that not a negative side effect of the pressure that you’re trying to impose, and self-defeating if the actual actions of the Iranian regime are going in the opposite direction you’re trying to achieve?




MR PALLADINO: We’re going to continue to exert maximum pressure against this regime. We ask that it modify its behavior, and the Secretary has been clear frequently on what we expect from the regime and human rights are certainly an important aspect of that. It’s – this is something that we’re going to ask others to help us with and we’re going to maintain this pressure on this regime. There is much more that it’s going to need to do.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: Are you disappointed – are you disappointed that it --




MR PALLADINO: Nick, Nick, do your follow-up. Nick.




QUESTION: Just the specifics on the secondary sanctions. Bolton said yesterday a number of countries may not be able to go to zero immediately, we want to achieve maximum pressure, we don’t want to harm friends or allies either. So just on what you were saying before, who are those friends and allies that you’re negotiating with? And have there been any decisions made – I know you said you’re in the middle of it, but any decisions made about specific countries on exceptions to Iranian oil sales?




MR PALLADINO: I would just say that we’re prepared to work with countries that are reducing their imports on a case-by-case basis, and our goal remains to get to zero.




QUESTION: But you are interested in working with countries not necessarily to get to zero so long as they’re showing progress?




MR PALLADINO: We’re prepared to work with countries that are reducing their imports on a case-by-case basis. We have an internal process to consider significant reduction exceptions for individual countries and we continue to discuss that. And I’m not going to go into detail, any further detail on what that would constitute.




QUESTION: China?




QUESTION: Turkey?




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: China?




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go to China.




QUESTION: Real quick.




MR PALLADINO: Who had China?




QUESTION: China right here.




MR PALLADINO: Okay.




QUESTION: Yeah. I just wanted to ask, there was a report out of Australia talking about these detention camps in Xinjiang increasing in size in just the last three months alone, and I’m wondering if the U.S. is considering any sanctions.




MR PALLADINO: We – I would just start off by saying we don’t preview sanctions from the State Department.




QUESTION: Well, is the State Department considering any kind of action to sort of change Chinese behavior?




MR PALLADINO: I would say about these what the Chinese Government has called humane vocational training sites, I believe – I would say that the United States is alarmed that the Chinese Government has detained as many as one million Uighurs, Kazakhs, and other members of minority Muslim groups in re-education camps in Xinjiang. And claims that these camps are humane job-training centers are preposterous. We will – the United States will continue to demand transparency and access for diplomats and journalists to Xinjiang, and we urge China to immediately release all those arbitrarily detained in these camps.




QUESTION: Turkey?




QUESTION: On Russia?




MR PALLADINO: Any more on China? Okay.




QUESTION: Turkey?




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go to Russia.




QUESTION: As we look to that deadline that we talked about yesterday, is it safe – on the secondary tranche of sanctions for chemical weapons on Russia, is it safe to say that they have neither assured the U.S. that they’re not using chemical weapons and have not allowed international inspectors in to make sure that’s the case?




MR PALLADINO: That’s not something I’m going to be able to speak to at the podium.




QUESTION: Turkey?




QUESTION: Robert, can we stay in the region? Can we stay in the region?




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go right here.




QUESTION: Actually, just on that and on the technical point that I raised yesterday about the actual date, so --




MR PALLADINO: Yeah. Okay.




QUESTION: So it goes by – this was actually announced and the determination was announced on August 8th, not – the determination may have been made on August 6th, but it wasn’t – but Congress wasn’t notified until August 8th. So are you sure that it’s November 6th and not November 8th, as I suggested it might be yesterday?




MR PALLADINO: Matt, I’m as good as the information that I have, and I am quite --




QUESTION: Well, that’s not very encouraging.




MR PALLADINO: I know, there we go. (Laughter.) No, I’ll take the question, but I’m pretty confident that we are – that we are confident.




QUESTION: Thanks. Okay, because if Congress wasn’t notified until the 8th, then I don’t know --




MR PALLADINO: I’d have to look --




QUESTION: All right.




MR PALLADINO: I’d have to ask a little bit more about that, but based upon the State Department’s calculation, we’re looking at – we’ve got the date. Yeah.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: (Inaudible.) Whether it’s the 6th or the 8th, do you believe that you have to announce on the 6th or the 8th your decision?




MR PALLADINO: Nick, we talked about this yesterday a little bit, and so November 6th is the deadline by which the State Department certifies to the Congress that Russia has met the conditions in the Chemical and Biological Weapons Act.




So that certification would basically be us – the State Department saying that Russia has taken steps to get back into compliance, and that would include Russia having ceased and ensured that it’s not going to use chemical weapons again, that it has allowed international inspectors to verify those assurances, et cetera. So if we can’t make such a certification by that time, then we are required to impose a second round of sanctions by the law after consultations with the Congress.




QUESTION: In other words – I’d love to meet the lawyer who wrote that explanation. The – in other words, what you’re saying is that you might not do anything on the 6th or the 8th.




MR PALLADINO: There’s no time – we must make a determination --




QUESTION: In other words, if you’re unable to – well, hold on a second. If you’re unable to --




MR PALLADINO: -- and begin consultations with the Congress --




QUESTION: If you’re unable to certify, do you have to affirmatively tell Congress that you cannot certify them on the 6th or the 8th?




MR PALLADINO: We – I would have to look at the statute itself on that, but we have to make a determination by the 6th or --




QUESTION: Well, apparently --




MR PALLADINO: -- begin consultations with the Congress. Correct.




QUESTION: Right, but you’re leaving – the way it sounds now is that you might not do anything on the 6th or the 8th. You don’t have to – if you can’t positively confirm or certify that Russia has taken these steps, it sounds to me like what you’re saying is that you don’t have to do anything. You just begin a consultation period with Congress.




MR PALLADINO: We will follow the law. We will --




QUESTION: Well that’s really, really good to hear.




MR PALLADINO: Okay.




QUESTION: But I’m asking more specifically if you are required to actually do something on the 6th or the 8th if you are unable to certify.




MR PALLADINO: We are required to begin coordination and consultation with the United States Congress, and that’s something that we will do.




QUESTION: Yeah, but that means you don’t actually have to do anything on the 6th or the 8th. You don’t have to come out and say, “We’re not able to certify,” or you can just go to the Hill and say, “All right, we’re going to start consulting you now, because we couldn’t certify.” And that means it might be – if this deadline, whatever day it is, could come and go without anything happening, right?




MR PALLADINO: We would make an internal decision. We might have nothing to share with you, Matt. That’s not to say that --




QUESTION: That wouldn’t be anything new.




MR PALLADINO: Okay.




QUESTION: Just to put a point on what Matt’s saying --




MR PALLADINO: Yeah.




QUESTION: There is no deadline for consultations with Congress. There’s just a deadline to start consultations with Congress.




MR PALLADINO: There is no timeline associated with these consultations. That is correct.




QUESTION: Turkey?




QUESTION: Myanmar?




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go --




QUESTION: Can we stay on Russia?




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go Turkey. Turkey.




QUESTION: Yesterday, you called on both sides, Turkey and SDF, to de-escalate the situation in Syria. I just want to know if any senior State Department official has reached out to his or her Turkish counterparts on this.




MR PALLADINO: Let me – yes, the answer is yes. We have been in touch with our Turkish counterparts on this. Next question.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: Turkey?




QUESTION: Yemen?




QUESTION: Turkey?




MR PALLADINO: I’m sorry. Sure, in the front right here, VOA.




QUESTION: Yes.




MR PALLADINO: Hi, Cindy.




QUESTION: Yes. Parents and families of Jamal Khashoggi are asking for his remains or at least part of his remains to be returned so that he can be given the burial that he wanted in Medina. Would you call on the Saudis to please turn over his remains to his family?




MR PALLADINO: Give me a second, please. Excuse me.




QUESTION: That would seem to be a question that could be able to be answered relatively quickly.




MR PALLADINO: I would say yes.




QUESTION: Got it.




MR PALLADINO: The United States would say that Mr. Khashoggi’s remains should be located and returned to his family for a proper burial as soon as possible.




QUESTION: Okay, thank you.




QUESTION: Is it your feeling that the Saudis know exactly where the remains are?




MR PALLADINO: We continue to work diligently to ascertain all facts involved in this murder. We’re going to hold accountable not only those who executed the murder but also those who led, were involved, and were connected to it. Any further --




QUESTION: Robert, do you have anything on Myanmar?




QUESTION: Yemen?




MR PALLADINO: Any further on Saudi Arabia?




QUESTION: Yemen.




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go – Myanmar?




QUESTION: Yeah.




MR PALLADINO: Sure, let’s try Myanmar.




QUESTION: Myanmar and Bangladesh have agreed to begin a repatriation of Rohingya refugees beginning in mid-November. There are a lot of concerns, though, that the conditions are not right and that Rohingya could be forcibly returned to Myanmar. Does the United States Government share those concerns?




MR PALLADINO: We – it’s important to us that our efforts remain focused on steps that would improve the situation for the Rohingya refugees and to hold accountable all those responsible for this. And our goal here is to ease human suffering and to address the root causes of conflict, violence, and abuse. We continue to call for accountability for those that were responsible, and we would look closely at any plans to ensure that it is in fact voluntary.




QUESTION: So you don’t have any comment on whether or not the conditions are right right now?




MR PALLADINO: Not from the podium today I don’t. I don’t have anything further on that right now, no.




Okay.




QUESTION: Yemen.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: Yemen?




QUESTION: Here.




MR PALLADINO: Okay, let’s go Yemen.




QUESTION: Do you have any updates on your calls for cessation of hostilities and anything that’s reducing the humanitarian crisis that’s going on? Has anybody from the State Department has reached out to either side?




MR PALLADINO: I would say that we talked a little bit about this yesterday. The deputy secretary of state met with Special Representative Griffiths just last week. We – based upon conversations that we have been having – diplomatic conversations, as well as intelligence, as well as other things that now – there is positive movement and we think that there is a – now is a good time to push forward on this.




QUESTION: But you in your statement day before yesterday and yesterday – you asked the rebels to stop and then the coalition will stop. Like, is there any change? Have you talked to either side? Have you reached out to either side?




MR PALLADINO: We are having dialogue with a wide range of Yemeni interlocutors and international partners on this, and we are engaged.




Yeah, please.




QUESTION: Why the sequencing? If you’re calling for a ceasefire, shouldn’t you call for a mutual cessation of hostilities? Why does one have to stop before the other, and the one that doesn’t have to stop is the one that’s bombing population areas?




MR PALLADINO: A little good faith up front, I think would be a good thing as we move forward. We’ve got to focus on what the goal here is, and we are – now is the time that we want to push forward the political solution, so first thing is stop – cessation in the hostilities and then push forward on the political engagement. And that’s what in the long run is going to be what reduces the – just the tragedy of human suffering that has transpired.




QUESTION: Sure, sure, but why isn’t it a mutual cessation of hostilities? Why does one have to end before the other?




MR PALLADINO: Our Saudi and Emirate partners, it’s – they have a right to defend their borders. We continue to support that right, and we call on the Houthis to cease missile and UAV strikes into Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates immediately, and then the rest of the progression can continue.




QUESTION: Robert, are you confident that both sides are interested in speaking, that they’re ready to come and actually engage in the way that you want them to?




MR PALLADINO: We – the climate is right based upon conversations that have taken place with our partners, with Yemeni interlocutors, and we have got a team very focused on this. And we are – we take – we do think that now is the time. There is a change.




And this is the last question. Yemen? Yemen?




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: Yemen.




QUESTION: Just to clarify, on Yemen.




MR PALLADINO: Yes.




QUESTION: Let me ask you to clarify on Yemen: Now, the Yemeni – the Houthis are saying that part of your plan is actually to divide Yemen. You don’t support as part of a political solution dividing Yemen again, do you?




MR PALLADINO: Martin Griffiths will take the lead on the political settlement, and I’m not going to get ahead of anything that he will be – that he’ll be tackling in that regard. That’s not something that I would want to address.




All right, last question. This one’s last. Okay, let’s – sir, let’s go. What have we got? You.




QUESTION: You’re expecting another meeting between President Trump and President Putin in Paris. Are there any meetings between Secretary Pompeo and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov planned before or during that event?




MR PALLADINO: I do not have anything to announce in that regard today, but thank you for the question and thank you all.




(The briefing was concluded at 3:09 p.m.)




DPB # 55









The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

View more on U.S. Department of State's website »
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on November 01, 2018 15:36

October 31, 2018

Department Press Briefings : Department Press Briefing - October 31, 2018

Robert Palladino





Deputy Spokesperson


Department Press Briefing





Washington, DC




October 31, 2018
Index for Today's Briefing

DEPARTMENT



CAMEROON



YEMEN



SAUDI ARABIA



NORTH KOREA



ISRAEL/PALESTINIANS



PAKISTAN



RUSSIA



TURKEY/SYRIA



DEPARTMENT



CHINA/TIBET



IRAN



RUSSIA



TURKEY



BRAZIL



SRI LANKA


TRANSCRIPT:





Today's briefing was held off-camera, so no video is available.






2:22 p.m. EDT




MR PALLADINO: A couple things for the top. Pleased to announce that Ambassador John Cotton Richmond, the department’s new Ambassador-at-Large to Monitor – to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons, started on Monday. Ambassador Richmond previously served as a federal prosecutor in the United States Department of Justice’s Human Trafficking Prosecution Unit; as an expert on human trafficking for the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime; and as a field office director at the International Justice Mission in Chennai, India. Most recently, Ambassador Richmond was co-founding director of the Human Trafficking institute, a non-governmental organization that works to improve criminal justice systems around the world and empower police and prosecutors to combat human trafficking.




The United States Department of State leads the United States global engagement to combat human trafficking and supports the coordination of anti-trafficking efforts across the United States Government. And just two weeks ago, Secretary Pompeo chaired the President’s Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons at the White House. At that meeting, Secretary Pompeo announced the creation of the Human Trafficking Expert Consultant Network, which will allow us to meaningfully incorporate survivor input into the department’s antit-rafficking work. He also announced a second 25 million award under the program to end modern slavery, which seeks to achieve a measurable reduction of modern slavery in specific countries or regions. This funding will continue this important work. And so we welcome Ambassador Richmond to the Department of State.




Secondly, The United States confirms the death of an American citizen near the town of Bambui, in the Mezam Division of Cameroon’s Northwest Region, on October 30th. We extend our deepest condolences to the family and friends of the deceased, and the department is providing all possible consular services. This tragedy occurred in the midst of the Anglophone crisis that affects the Northwest and Southwest Regions of Cameroon. Both the separatist fighters and government security forces have used violence against innocent civilians. We call on both sides to view the tragic death of this American citizen as an opportunity to put an immediate stop to violence and to allow unhindered access for humanitarian aid workers and healthcare providers in the Northwest and Southwest Regions. We urge all sides to undertake an immediate and broad-based dialogue without preconditions to restore peace and resolve grievances.




With that, I’d be happy to take some questions.




QUESTION: Just on that to start with briefly. Do you have any indication that the – there are some reports indicating the family believes that he was – this person was targeted intentionally, and there are other reports that it may have been the government that was responsible for – government forces that were responsible for killing him. Can you shed any light on either of those two?




MR PALLADINO: We’ve – sure. Thanks, Matt. We’ve been in touch with senior Cameroonian officials, government security officials, and we believe the victim was caught in crossfire.




QUESTION: So not intentionally?




MR PALLADINO: Correct, correct. And Cameroonian officials have assured us that a full investigation has been opened and that the results would be shared with us.




QUESTION: Okay. If no one has anything else --




MR PALLADINO: Any other?




QUESTION: -- I want to ask about yesterday’s statements on Yemen, and then to – from both Secretary Pompeo and Secretary Mattis. And then I’m a little bit curious why he did two interviews this morning and he didn’t mention Yemen at all, after what appeared to be such a concerted combination one-two punch, shall we say, delivered by the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State yesterday. Why? What’s going on here?




MR PALLADINO: Well, as you point out, the Secretary did issue a statement last night about ending the conflict in Yemen. And the statement goes through in detail some of the sequencing that we expect, and we’re calling for an immediate cessation of hostilities. We’re calling that the Houthis must cease missile and UAV strikes into Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates immediately. And as soon as this happens, the Saudi-led coalition must cease airstrikes in all populated areas.




As far as the political process goes, we are calling on all parties to support the United Nations Special Envoy Martin Griffiths in finding a peaceful solution to the conflict based upon the agreed references, and that’s the national dialogue, the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2216, and the Gulf and the GCC initiative as well.




Now, as far as the Secretary’s interviews this morning, I listened to them and he was responding to questions asked by the interviewers, so I would say --




QUESTION: Well, it was a function of the questions he was asked not the function of this having dropped off or dropped lower down on his radar screen in the past 12 hours.




MR PALLADINO: This is incredibly important to the United States Government and to the Secretary of State, absolutely.




QUESTION: And then just one more thing and I’ll stop. When you say that as soon as the Houthis stop their missile strikes then the coalition should stop its airstrikes in populated areas, does that mean, one, that while airstrikes continue you’re okay with them continuing to bomb populated areas in which there have been – it’s been well documented that these have caused major numbers of civilian casualties? And then two, even if that’s not the case, does it mean then that after the – if and when the Houthis stop, that you’re okay with the coalition bombing quote/unquote “unpopulated areas” and continuing this, because – and how do you define a populated area? Is that just places where – a place where people have a residence?




MR PALLADINO: What we’re calling for is an immediate cessation of hostilities. We want to see the parties engaging in the United Nations special envoy’s consultations in good faith, and we believe that the cessation of hostilities will provide the best basis for that. And as far as the specific conditions go, the – that’s something for the United Nations special envoy to speak to and I don’t want to get ahead of what he’s able to do during his November consultations.




QUESTION: Well, fair enough. But you didn’t answer either of my questions. Are you okay with the Saudis continuing to bomb populated areas of Yemen if the Houthis have not stopped all their missile strikes?




MR PALLADINO: We are – our goal here has been consistent for some time, and that is specifically to work with international partners, our international partners, to bring peace, prosperity, and security to Yemen. And we have been consistently and continuously urging all sides to work towards a political settlement that ends the conflict in this dire humanitarian situation. We’ve always said that an enduring solution will only come through a comprehensive political agreement, and that’s going to require compromise. We’ve also always supported comprehensive peace negotiations under the auspices of the United Nations, and we’ve supported the United Nations special envoy’s efforts to restart talks of those parties.




Now, as far as the timing goes, the United Nations special envoy has continued to make progress in laying the groundwork for these peace negotiations, and I would point to last week. Based upon our meetings here at the State Department – well, with the Deputy Secretary of State, his meeting with him last week, we believe that the climate is right for both sides to come to the table. And what the United States is reiterating and trying to state clearly at this time is our support for a cessation of hostilities and the UN special envoy is important, and this cessation and a vigorous resumption of political talks, that’s what’s going to help us end this humanitarian crisis.




So our message is end the conflict, replace the conflict with compromise, and allow the Yemeni people to heal through peace and reconstruction.




QUESTION: I’ll let it go, but can you just acknowledge that you’re not answering my question? (Laughter.)




MR PALLADINO: We’ve been – we have called for cessation of hostilities --




QUESTION: (Inaudible) yes or no.




MR PALLADINO: -- for a long time now.




QUESTION: (Inaudible.) Move on.




MR PALLADINO: Excellent.




QUESTION: Can I just follow up on this very point?




MR PALLADINO: Yes, Said.




QUESTION: You’re saying that, first of all, cessation of bombing in populated areas which you allude to, which means that they will continue selective bombing. But second, forces on the ground can’t remain exactly where they are? Is that what you’re saying?




MR PALLADINO: What I would say is we continue to support the right of Saudi Arabia and our Emirati partners to defend their borders. And as far as – I don’t want to get ahead of consultations that are led by the UN special envoy’s agenda. But I would understand that his consultations would include topics such as implementing confidence-building measures to address the underlying issues of the conflict, demilitarization of the borders, and concentration of all large weapons under international observation.




QUESTION: Can I follow up on that (inaudible)?




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: Okay, let’s try – let’s go right here. Sure, go ahead.




QUESTION: Your critics would say that the U.S. could stop this war almost immediately by pulling support, military support for the coalition. If you are interested in ending the war, why not do that?




MR PALLADINO: The timing right now, we’ve come – we’ve seen progress being made on the ground, and we continue to make progress on laying the groundwork for peace negotiations. We – the deputy secretary of state’s meeting last week has brought this fresh to the fore, and the climate is right. We’ve come to the assessment that the climate is right at this time to move forward.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: (Inaudible) right now versus --




MR PALLADINO: I’m not going to be able to go into detail on the – on private conversations. This – let’s go right over here, please.




QUESTION: Thank you very much.




MR PALLADINO: Go ahead.




QUESTION: On North Korea.




QUESTION: Can you stay on Yemen?




QUESTION: Oh, okay.




MR PALLADINO: All right. One more. One more. Let’s go on Yemen. All right. All right.




QUESTION: To what extent do you think that the Khashoggi matter gives the U.S. more leverage in solving problems like this one?




MR PALLADINO: The two are unrelated. Over here, Michelle. Go ahead.




QUESTION: Wait a minute, wait a minute. Can I follow up on that, please?




QUESTION: Can you say what the consequences there will be? You’re calling for a 30-day ceasefire, but if that doesn’t come through, if the Saudis don’t support that, what are the consequences? What does the U.S. plan to do? Has there been any threat given?




MR PALLADINO: We’re going to focus on what’s right immediately in front of us. We’re not going to get into hypotheticals. We’ve made our call clear. We’ve made clear what we’re urging all sides to do and we’re going to support the United Nations.




Last one on Yemen. Right there. Go.




QUESTION: Can I just follow up on that, the question about Khashoggi? I understand you said that they’re unrelated, but this is not the first concern you’ve had about Saudi Arabia and this government. And so to what extent is this incident, the coverup, the way the Saudis have dealt with it, part of a larger conversation going forward about the actions of this government and the need for the U.S. and Saudi Arabia to move forward working collaboratively in a new spirit?




MR PALLADINO: We've – the Secretary spoke about what we expect related to the Khashoggi investigation this morning again, and we – and that hasn’t changed. We will hold those responsible for the killing of Jamal Khashoggi. We'll hold them responsible, and we want all the evidence, we want to get all the facts first, before we make a determination on what our response to that is going to be.




QUESTION: It’s not in a vacuum, though, in terms of some of the larger concerns that you’ve had about the adventurism, some might say, of the government, of their actions in Yemen, of their actions vis-a-vis Qatar. I mean, this is part of a larger concern, isn’t it, that you’ve had with this government?




MR PALLADINO: I would say that our call for a cessation of hostilities is something that we’ve been doing for some time right now in Yemen. This is consistent, and we are raising it again now at this time because the time is right. We’ve been calling for this throughout the conflict, the cessation of hostilities, and now is the time for both sides to come to the table.




QUESTION: And you don’t feel like – just one more on this – and you don’t feel right now that the kind of Saudi desire to not placate, but smooth over relations with the United States in the wake of this incident gives you a little bit more of an opportunity, a open door, an open ear if you will for them to hear these concerns about Yemen, Qatar, or other things?




MR PALLADINO: They’re unrelated. Let’s go to North Korea. Right here, please.




QUESTION: Thank you very much. On North Korean human rights issues, there is 120,000 North Korean religious peoples and the people of North Korea are now in political prison camp in North Korea. How will the United States resolve the North Korean human right abuse? Do you have any agenda for further religious freedoms from North Korea?




MR PALLADINO: Look, the United States has been pretty forthright on North Korea’s human rights record. It’s something that we document annually, it’s something that we have raised consistently. The President has highlighted it repeatedly both from the Oval Office to the State of the Union address. We have been consistent on the human rights situation in North Korea. Right now, we’re very focused on achieving the final, fully verified denuclearization of North Korea, and that is something that the United States Government hopes to push forward and to satisfy the agreement that was made at the Singapore summit between Chairman Kim and President Trump. And so we’re going to continue pushing forward on that, and that will allow further vehicles for the United States to engage on all kinds of issues as we’re able to go forward.




QUESTION: North Korea?




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: More on North Korea?




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go to North Korea. One more on North Korea right there, sure.




QUESTION: Just – it’s been brought up before and it’s brought up to the Secretary. You said the final verified denuclearization, but you dropped the “irreversible.” Is that intentional?




MR PALLADINO: Final, fully verified. That’s about – that’s everything as far as I can --




QUESTION: Because before, the State Department was saying “irreversible,” and recently the “irreversible” has been dropped. Is it --




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: I really don’t have the order of adjectives. I’ve got nothing further on our order of adjectives right now.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: We got a little more on North Korea?




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: Let’s stick right here in the front. North Korea.




QUESTION: The Secretary mentioned that he’s meeting with his North Korean counterpart again in an interview today. Do you have any more details on that? That’s the second time I believe he’s been on the record mentioning this.




MR PALLADINO: I think what the Secretary said, he would be speaking to his North Korean counterpart.




QUESTION: So there is no meeting?




MR PALLADINO: I have nothing – no further details to provide about how that speaking to his counterpart will take place, where, when, et cetera. I have nothing further at this time.




QUESTION: (Inaudible) smoke signals?




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: I will support smoke signals, Matt. Okay?




QUESTION: What is the Secretary – what’s the Secretary doing today? Where is he? Is he in town?




MR PALLADINO: I would refer you to his public schedule. I have nothing further beyond his public schedule, right --




QUESTION: Robert, in the interview, in the – I think the same interview you were just mentioning, he said something about the North Koreans having agreed to inspectors at two separate sites. One of those is the nuclear site. Do you happen to know what the other one is?




MR PALLADINO: I don’t. I don’t have that in front of me. But that – but I mean, inspections for final, fully verified denuclearization, “verified” and “inspections” go hand in hand. This was something that was raised on the Secretary of State’s trip to Pyongyang recently and the modalities and the composition of these inspections is something that they’ll be discussing going forward. Yeah.




QUESTION: Okay. The other thing is that in response to the question on human rights, you said the administration’s focus now is on the denuclearization, whatever words you want to put in front of “denuclearization,” and that once that – you get that, that will allow further vehicles to engage the North Koreans on other subjects. How is that any different than what the Obama administration said it did with Iran? I mean, it seems to me that that was exactly their argument for why they were only focused on the nuclear question in the negotiations with Iran because once they got that, that would open up, to use your words, other vehicles so they could address human rights, they could address missiles, they could address the malign activity. Now, this administration, after criticizing the previous one for doing that, you’re adopting – you seem to be adopting the exact same approach with North Korea. So how is it different?




MR PALLADINO: Iran’s malign influence has expanded credibly since that deal was enacted under the previous administration




QUESTION: Well, how do you know that the North Koreans won’t do the same thing?




MR PALLADINO: We have an opportunity with North Korea to – we’ve made more progress in this administration on moving towards peace than previously has been made. This is really a new opportunity. Nuclear testing has stopped, the ballistic missile tests have stopped. We are – our Americans have been returned home, and we are making progress on this front. We believe that there is a brighter future for the North Korean people and we’re going to continue pushing forward on this. Anything more on North Korea?




QUESTION: Do you have anything to say about the no-fly zone over the DMZ agreed to between North and South Korea going into effect?




MR PALLADINO: I – we’re in close coordination with our Republic of Korea ally.




QUESTION: Well, yeah, but --




MR PALLADINO: We continue this coordination --




QUESTION: But the U.S. was opposed to the no-fly zone in the past. Do you have anything to say now that it’s going into effect?




MR PALLADINO: We are maintaining very close coordination with our Republic of Korea ally as well as our Japanese ally. We are coordinating on a daily basis. Our special representative, Steve Biegun, was just in Seoul over the last week and as I mentioned yesterday, we’re going to be further strengthening the coordination that’s happening between our two governments as we move forward. Change the subject. All right, Said. Go ahead.




QUESTION: Yeah, very quickly. Yesterday the secretary general of the PLO, Saeb Erekat, accused Israel of plotting to separate Gaza from the whole Palestinian issue with your help. Are you committed to the unity of the Palestinian issue, Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, as you were in the past?




MR PALLADINO: I would quote our Special Representative for International Negotiations Jason Greenblatt on this subject. He’s been quite clear, and what he’s said is that Gaza and the West Bank have been separated for 10 years, not only physically but politically, between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, and it’s absurd to deny that reality. In contrast, our peace plan intends to bring them together. Make no mistake, we are in this to help all Palestinians in both the West Bank and Gaza. The type of disinformation being spread by some parties who have not even seen the plan yet wish to be spoilers and does nothing to benefit ordinary Palestinian lives.




QUESTION: So independent of, let’s say, the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza, you believe that the Palestinian issue ought to be resolved as one issue?




MR PALLADINO: We have made it clear that the final boundaries of Israeli sovereignty and Jerusalem remains to be decided through negotiations.




QUESTION: Robert, no one’s seen the plan. Have you? No one’s seen it, so in the absence of people not seeing something that the administration keeps saying is wonderful and great and is going to be the deal of the century, but there is no there there, I mean, how do – what are people supposed to – how are people supposed to understand or accept your explanation that these -- this misinformation is not true if there’s no way to prove that it’s misinformation?




MR PALLADINO: Well, decrying a peace plan that has not yet been seen does nothing to advance the cause of peace or to lead the Palestinian people to a better future.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: And when – we will – what we will – we will release the plan at the appropriate time and we hope that people will judge it on its merits.




QUESTION: So promoting a plan that no one has seen before doesn’t do the same thing?




MR PALLADINO: We – let’s, at the appropriate time, let the people judge it on its merits.




QUESTION: Different topic?




QUESTION: Russia?




QUESTION: North Korea.




MR PALLADINO: Different – okay, let’s go to Shaun. I’m going to go to Shaun in the front, AFP.




QUESTION: Pakistan. Pakistan.




MR PALLADINO: Pakistan. Okay.




QUESTION: A Pakistani – the supreme court rescinded the blasphemy verdict against Asia Bibi. I know that’s been something that in the past has concerned the United States. Do you have any reaction to this decision? To what extent was the U.S. in contact in – ahead of this decision?




MR PALLADINO: We’re aware of the decision and we’ve been following the case closely, as you point out and say.




QUESTION: Do you have any comment on the decision itself?




MR PALLADINO: I would just say as a general principle – I mean, we’ve spoken about the case previously in our International Religious Freedom Report, and so we – the United States Government has spoken about the case previously. As a general principle, we’ve been clear that religious freedom is a universal, God-given right to which all people are entitled. Secretary Pompeo has said as much many times.




Please.




QUESTION: Iran. Iran.




MR PALLADINO: Same – we off of Pakistan?




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: Khashoggi.




QUESTION: Russia.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: Russia. Let’s go to Russia. Russia.




QUESTION: Well, the U.S. is now quitting the treaty, and Russia is asking question: When will U.S. agree to revive the strategic dialogue? So as far as we know, such questions were asked since June, when Andrea Thompson came to the office. So – and since that, Russia has not any reply. So when do you think will it be – it will be possible to come back to the dialogue?




MR PALLADINO: Yeah, I don’t have anything for you on that today from the podium.




Let’s go – Laurie. Let’s go to Laurie.




QUESTION: Yesterday, Turkey’s president again threatened Syria’s Kurds, and it has begun shelling Kurdish cities. In turn, the Syrian Democratic Forces led by the Kurds have announced today a temporary halt in their offensive against ISIS. What is your comment on this situation?




MR PALLADINO: Unilateral military strikes into northwest Syria by any party, particularly as American personnel may be present or in the vicinity, are of great concern to us. Coordination and consultation between the United States and Turkey on issues of security concern is a better approach. We have been in touch with Turkey and the Syria defense forces to emphasize the need to de-escalate the situation. Turkey is a NATO ally and a key partner in the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, and we are fully committed to our ally’s border security.




QUESTION: And Erdogan also accused you of supporting, quote, “all terrorist organizations indiscriminately,” end quote, including ISIS. What’s your response to that?




MR PALLADINO: We – coordination and consultation with our Turkish ally on issues of security is the better approach. We have seen such cooperation with our – with Turkey in – with our Manbij roadmap, for example, and that’s an example of our full commitment. It’s on schedule. It’s something that Secretary Pompeo and the foreign minister of Turkey agreed to. You can see American and Turkish forces actively training side by side. That’s a critical mission, and we’re confident that that kind of cooperation is what is needed here.




Now, ISIS – that campaign is not over and that fight remains difficult. And our Department of Defense colleagues are working closely with the Syrian defense forces who are in the midst of an offensive operations against ISIS and we’re still committed to the Syria defense forces.




QUESTION: Robert, the Russian military said that the coalition – as a result of the coalition airstrikes in eastern Syria, 120 civilians were killed last month alone. Are you keeping – how do you track casualties and so on on the ground in the areas where the coalition is targeting ISIS?




MR PALLADINO: I saw that report in RT, I believe, right?




QUESTION: Yes.




MR PALLADINO: Okay. We – I would say first off, of course we deeply regret any civilian casualties that are a consequence of coalition operations in Syria. Secondly, I would say we defer to the Department of Defense on the matter of the airstrikes that you mentioned. And I would finally say that we have not seen any information to suggest that such claims are accurate and anything more than additional Russian propaganda.




QUESTION: On the (inaudible) in Syria --




QUESTION: Speaking of Russian propaganda --




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go over here. Michelle, fine, go.




QUESTION: So you opened yesterday talking about the Global Engagement Center and a move of putting $40 million in towards countering disinformation from Russia, Iran. I wonder, given that, if you had any comment from this building on the segment put out by Radio Marti, the U.S. taxpayer-funded station, which appeared to involve some disinformation about George Soros.




MR PALLADINO: Give me a second here. I would refer to the CEO’s statement on that, CEO’s statement from the Office on Cuba Broadcasting, and I would refer to them. But I would point out that the CEO said that those deemed responsible for this production will be immediately placed on administrative leave pending an investigation into their apparent misconduct and that TV Marti has directed an immediate, full-content audit to identify any patterns of unethical reporting at the network. And anything further than that, I would refer you to the United States Agency for Global Media.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: Two Saudi questions?




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go right here. Nike, go.




QUESTION: Thank you. Can we stay in Asia? In Tibet, do you have anything on this sad news about the pass away of Lodi Gyari Rinpoche, who used to be the special envoy of His Holiness Dalai Lama in Washington, D.C., and he pass away on Monday.




MR PALLADINO: I’m sorry. I just don’t have anything on that today, but we could take that question and we could get back to you. I’m sorry, I haven’t seen that report.




QUESTION: What is the message we should be reading given there has not been a special – has not been a Tibet special coordinator at State Department under this administration?




MR PALLADINO: The – we are well served by our Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, as well as our International Freedom Office here at the State Department. That’s not to say that this position is not something that we want to see supported as soon as possible as well.




QUESTION: There has not been a dialogue between the Chinese Government and the Tibetan exile government. Would the United States support the resumption of a dialogue? You can answer in Mandarin if you wish.




MR PALLADINO: (Speaks in Mandarin.) I’ll take your question, though, and we’ll get you a proper answer, okay, Nike? Thanks. Let’s go.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: On Iran.




MR PALLADINO: Iran, back to Iran, all right. Who’s got Iran? Who’s – where’s Iran?




QUESTION: It’s next to --




MR PALLADINO: Yeah, help me out, Matt, good.




QUESTION: It’s between Iraq and Afghanistan.




MR PALLADINO: Excellent, excellent.




QUESTION: He had to think about it for a second.




QUESTION: Well, I was – yeah.




MR PALLADINO: Do we have a question on Iran?




QUESTION: Saudi?




QUESTION: Robert --




MR PALLADINO: A question on Iran?




QUESTION: We have some Saudi questions.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: Let’s stick with Iran. Let’s go with Iran. Go ahead. Go ahead with Iran, please.




QUESTION: Thank you. The second round of sanctions are going into effect on Sunday. Which sanctions will be going into effect and which specific industries will they target? And then second, has Secretary Pompeo discussed with Secretary Mnuchin sanctioning Iran’s access to SWIFT?




MR PALLADINO: Okay, I’ll start with the second question, and the questions on SWIFT I would refer to the Department of Treasury and I’m not going to be able to go into dialogue between the two secretaries at this point. But on November 5th, 12:01, as you point out, sanctions that were lifted under the Iran nuclear deal will come back into full effect. And the sanctions that are reimposed on November 5th will target critical sectors of Iran’s economy, such as energy, shipping and the ship-building sectors, as well as the provision of insurance and transactions involving the Central Bank of Iran and designated Iranian financial institutions.




Now, the Iranian regime is the world’s leading state sponsor of terror, and these sanctions are meant to cut off revenues that the Iranian regime uses to conduct terrorism and fund terrorist groups around the world, and that includes Lebanese Hizballah, Hamas, Kata'ib Hizballah and the Taliban. These groups foment global instability, they use these funds to support their nuclear and ballistic missile programs, and these funds are used to line corrupt Iranian leaders’ pockets rather than help the Iranian people, who are the longest-suffering victims. I’ll stop there.




QUESTION: And just a quick follow-up. Will there be a third round of U.S. sanctions on – or will all sanctions that have been lifted under the JCPOA have been reimposed by November 5th?




MR PALLADINO: I have nothing – I can’t forecast anything beyond that at this time.




QUESTION: Are you – are you going to do more sanctions on Russia in November or not?




MR PALLADINO: On Russia sanctions – I have this – the Chemical and Biological Weapons Act mandates that the State Department certify to the Congress whether Russia has met conditions required by the law three months after the initial determination of the Skripal case. Now, that initial determination was made August 6th, and that takes us to November 6th, which is the certification deadline. So November 6th, that’s the deadline by which the Department of State must certify to the Congress that Russia has met the conditions in the Chemical and Biological Weapons Act. The conditions that we would have to certify are that Russia has ceased and assured that it will not use chemical weapons again, and that it has allowed international inspectors to verify those assurances. So have they taken the steps to get back into compliance is the issue. And if we can’t make such a certification, the State Department is required to impose a second round of sanctions after consultations with the Congress.




QUESTION: And what kind of sanctions it should be? Can you say this now or it’s undecided?




MR PALLADINO: I can’t – I cannot preview that today, no.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: Matt’s got a Russia follow-up.




QUESTION: No, I just – you said November 6th and I just want to make sure that that’s the – is that the correct day? Because the way I had calculated it, and maybe I’m wrong – fully willing to admit that – was November 8th. But --




MR PALLADINO: The 6th.




QUESTION: Okay.




MR PALLADINO: The 6th.




QUESTION: China?




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: Any sign of them meeting those conditions? Any sign of them allowing inspectors in?




MR PALLADINO: I’m not going to get ahead of that, (inaudible), get ahead of that at this time.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: Any Russia?




QUESTION: Khashoggi.




QUESTION: Iran.




MR PALLADINO: Khashoggi? Let’s go to Turkey.




QUESTION: Russia, Russia.




MR PALLADINO: I’m sorry, to – Saudi Arabia. Go ahead. And Turkey. There we go.




QUESTION: Secretary Mattis said last night that so far, everything that the Turks have said about the case has turned out to be true. This morning, the Turkish prosecutor said that Mr. Khashoggi was brought to the consulate, strangled, his body was dismembered, and that the Saudis haven’t been able to produce a body so far. Is that true? Is that your understanding?




MR PALLADINO: We’ve got to see where the facts ultimately fall. We’re still in that. We are still calling for a full accounting of what’s transpired. There’s more that we want to learn first. And what we acquire will come from both the Turkish and Saudi investigations as well as what we are able to gather on our own.




QUESTION: So --




MR PALLADINO: And we will form – we will form an assessment and make determinations about future actions based upon this full accounting. We have – I’ll stop there.




QUESTION: Do you see it as a problem that the Saudis won’t extradite these people that they’ve already identified as being responsible or involved to Turkey?




MR PALLADINO: We are – we want all the facts first, and we are going to remain focused on getting a full accounting of what’s transpired. The Secretary of State has spoken repeatedly to Saudi leadership – to the king --




QUESTION: Right, so --




MR PALLADINO: -- to the crown prince, to the foreign minister. We have made clear the seriousness to which the United States attaches to what’s transpired, the unacceptability of what’s taken place, and at the same time we recognize the importance of protecting American interests as well.




This is the last question. Right there, please. Go.




QUESTION: About Brazil. Secretary Pompeo talked on Monday with the new president-elect in Brazil, Bolsonaro. They mentioned Venezuela, so I was curious if you could provide us some more detail about specifically what they talk about Venezuela, and what kind of partnership – could, like, the U.S. help with Brazil regarding this topic, Venezuela.




MR PALLADINO: I’m sorry, I don’t have anything additional beyond the readout regarding the content of their discussion, but our policy on Venezuela has been pretty forthright, pretty clear, and a clear majority of countries in our hemisphere, we are united in support of the Venezuelan people and their right to live in a democracy. And as far as Brazil goes, the President has called the president-elect, the Secretary of State has called him as well. And of course, the inauguration won’t take place for a little bit, but we look forward to working with the new Brazilian Government. We’ve got a lot of common interests and shared things that we hope to accomplish together and with --




QUESTION: May I follow up on that?




QUESTION: A question on --




MR PALLADINO: Last one.




QUESTION: A follow-up on that.




MR PALLADINO: Go – just follow – go.




QUESTION: Would like the – would the U.S. like Brazil to have a more active role in Venezuela?




MR PALLADINO: I don’t have anything further. Of course, we are looking for the – there’s a lot of countries that are active with us, and it’s a clear majority, and there’s always more that we can do. We need to apply sustained pressure on the Maduro regime until it takes the actions that are necessary to return to democracy. The Venezuelan people are the ones that are suffering under what’s transpired in Venezuela, and they desperately need access to humanitarian aid, and we call upon the Maduro regime to return to the 1999 constitution, to respect human rights and the authority of the democratically elected national assembly. We call on the Maduro regime to release all political prisoners and to permit entry of international assistance to provide for the urgent humanitarian needs of the long-suffering Venezuelan people.




Thank you all. Have a good night.




QUESTION: Can you take the – Robert, can you take the Sri Lanka question?




MR PALLADINO: Take the – okay, the --




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: Okay, Sri Lanka. All right.




QUESTION: (Inaudible) update on the crisis in Sri Lanka.




MR PALLADINO: Okay.




QUESTION: There’s no end to crisis, and they haven’t listened to your calls on – immediately calling on the parliament to elect a --




MR PALLADINO: Okay, so thank you for the question. It is an important question, and I am happy to take a second day of Sri Lanka questions. As you point out, this is an important issue. The United States for now, we’re focused on the need for Sri Lanka to follow the necessary constitutional process to determine its leadership. So we – again, we call on the president in consultation with the speaker to reconvene parliament immediately and to allow the democratically elected representatives of the Sri Lankan people to fulfill their responsibility to affirm who will lead their government. And we urge all sides to uphold the law and to respect due process.




QUESTION: Has the new ambassador taken over there?




MR PALLADINO: The new ambassador arrived today and presents her credentials tomorrow. So yes, she’s there.




QUESTION: So as of today, who do you recognize as the prime minister of Sri Lanka?




MR PALLADINO: The Sri Lankan constitution includes provisions on changes in the government and related authorities, and the implementation of those provisions is a matter for the elected representatives of the Sri Lankan people. It’s up to the parliament to decide who the prime minister is. And that’s it. Thank you.




QUESTION: Final question --




QUESTION: Thanks.




QUESTION: Thank you.




(The briefing was concluded at 3:08 p.m.)









The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

View more on U.S. Department of State's website »
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on October 31, 2018 14:38

October 30, 2018

Department Press Briefings : Department Press Briefing - October 30, 2018

Robert Palladino





Deputy Spokesperson


Department Press Briefing





Washington, DC




October 30, 2018
Index for Today's Briefing

DEPARTMENT



ISRAEL/OMAN



GREECE



DEPARTMENT



SRI LANKA



NORTH KOREA/SOUTH KOREA



IRAN/IRAQ/SOUTH KOREA



MIDDLE EAST PEACE



SAUDI ARABIA/TURKEY



CAMEROON



MEXICO


TRANSCRIPT:





Today's briefing was held off-camera, so no video is available.






2:15 p.m. EDT




MR PALLADINO: Hi, guys. A couple things for the top. We have an update on – for you all on the Global Engagement Center and their efforts to counter foreign disinformation. At the end of September, the Global Engagement Center obligated 40 million to support initiatives to counter disinformation and propaganda spread by foreign countries abroad. That funding included an extra 20 million provided to the Global Engagement Center by Congress in the Fiscal Year 2018 omnibus spending bill and 20 million from the Department of Defense transferred to the State Department.




This funding will support a variety of efforts to counter Russian, Iranian, and Chinese disinformation and propaganda directed to foreign audiences. These initiatives include deploying technology to provide early warnings of foreign disinformation, analyzing those foreign audiences that are most susceptible to disinformation, developing partnerships with key local social media influencers to produce content to reach critical audiences, and building the technical skills of civil society organizations, nongovernmental organizations, local influencers, and journalists to shed light on the spread of disinformation.




The Fiscal Year 2019 National Defense Authorization Act extends the Department of Defense’s authority to transfer funding to the State Department for these efforts through fiscal year 2020. This will allow the Departments of State and Defense to continue developing new joint initiatives to counter foreign disinformation.




Second, happy birthday. Combatting international crime, including drug trafficking, transnational gang activity, and corruption is one of the key ways that the State Department keeps America safe, and the bureau here at the State Department that leads these efforts is the International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs Bureau, or as we call it, INL. And they are celebrating their 40th anniversary this month. After an initial focus on halting cocaine trafficked from the Andes – that was back in the 1990s – or that was back – in the 1990s, INL expanded to what we have today, and that is global diplomacy and foreign assistance platform to fight crime and strengthen justice sectors at every level.




In 2018 stopping the flow of opioids into the United States is INL’s highest drug control priority, and last month at the United Nations President Trump launched a global call to action on the world drug problem, with 130 countries joining that effort. The State Department, via our INL Bureau, is at the forefront of such work, including diplomacy to increase international restrictions on synthetic opioids and supporting Mexico’s ability to eradicate poppy and take down clandestine labs. INL will continue to fight to keep Americans safe into the future, meeting new drug and crime threats as they emerge.




Third, we welcome – the United States welcomes the visit last week of Prime Minister Netanyahu to Oman, where he was received by Sultan Qaboos and senior members of the Omani government. We commend the Sultan’s initiative in issuing this invitation and opening this dialogue. This marked a helpful step in all of our efforts to strengthen relationships across the region and build a brighter future for Israel, the Palestinians, and all of their neighbors.




Last one. The United States once again strongly condemns the release of convicted terrorist Dimitris Koufodinas on a six-day reprieve from his imprisonment in Greece, his fifth and longest furlough in the last year. Koufodinas is a terrorist who has been convicted of multiple murders, including United States mission personnel. These furloughs are a shameful injustice to his many victims’ families and serve as an incentive for his anarchist followers to commit further violent and destructive acts in his name. Our embassy in Athens has conveyed our serious concerns about this decision to the Greek government.




With that, I’ll – happy to take some questions.




QUESTION: Can I --




MR PALLADINO: Matt.




QUESTION: Thanks, Robert. Can I just start on your first announcement there on the GEC?




MR PALLADINO: Right.




QUESTION: Is there something that is new in that that you were trying to highlight? Because if there was, I missed it. I apologize.




MR PALLADINO: The transfer has taken place and the money has been obligated. And I reviewed some of the --




QUESTION: No, no, I understand that. Well, but I thought the money was transferred and --




MR PALLADINO: At the end of September.




QUESTION: Yeah, it’s now the end of October, though.




MR PALLADINO: Right. And we are announcing it today. We haven’t done it previously. We’re providing you with a recent update on that. That’s right.




QUESTION: Okay, a month after it happened. Is that correct? Did the money just get there today? I’m just trying --




MR PALLADINO: The money has now been obligated, so the money was received and it’s now all been obligated. And we’ve pushed that forward on several very large projects, and that’s some – the overview that was provided.




QUESTION: Right. I want to start on something that I don’t usually start on here, Sri Lanka. What is your understanding of the situation with the prime minister and the government there? Do you consider the former prime minister to still be the legitimate prime minister? And if you do or if you don’t, do you believe that his ouster was an unconstitutional change in government, which would require – which would be a coup, which would require U.S. action?




MR PALLADINO: Yeah. What we would say that we believe – the United States believes the determination should be made in accordance with the Sri Lankan law and due process. But to step back from that, we are following developments in Sri Lanka with concern, and we are – we urge all sides to respect due process. We call on the president, in consultation with the speaker, to reconvene parliament immediately and allow the democratically-elected representatives of Sri Lanka to fulfill their responsibility to affirm who will lead their government.




We expect the Government of Sri Lanka to uphold its commitment to human rights, rule of law, reform, accountability, justice, and reconciliation regardless of who occupies that leadership position.




QUESTION: I’m sorry. Your first answer there – the determination will be made by them? You mean the determination of whether this is a coup or not? What determination?




MR PALLADINO: Leadership in Sri Lanka. We call for it to be made in determination with Sri Lankan law and due process.




QUESTION: But it’s your responsibility – the U.S. government’s law – that says that you have to – I realize the previous administration found a crazy way around this in Egypt. But if you determine – and you should make that determination – whether the government was changed unconstitutionally, there should be some kind of consequence legally.




MR PALLADINO: We call on the president of Sri Lanka, again, to reconvene his parliament and to allow the democratically elected representatives of the Sri Lankan people to fulfill their responsibility in accordance with Sri Lankan law and due process to determine the leadership of their government. And I have no further information on this subject.




QUESTION: So in other words, you have not made a determination one way or another?




MR PALLADINO: We call – this determination needs to be made in accordance with due process and Sri Lankan law. That’s the United States’ position.




QUESTION: I’m not talking about the determination of who leads the country. I’m talking about the U.S. determination on whether what happened was an unconstitutional change in democratically elected government.




MR PALLADINO: We’re following it closely with concern, and I’ll leave it at that.




QUESTION: Can I follow up? Can we have a follow-up on it?




MR PALLADINO: AFP. And I don’t have much more than this. I’m sorry, Shaun, but go ahead.




QUESTION: Sure. On the role of China, at least one member of parliament in Sri Lanka has accused Beijing of contributing to the ouster of Prime Minister Wickremesinghe. Does the United States believe in that assessment, and what has the U.S. role been in dealing with the two sides there?




MR PALLADINO: I would just say that we would call on all sides to respect the law and due process and refrain from intimidation and leave it at that.




QUESTION: Okay, can I just have another?




MR PALLADINO: Okay, one follow-up.




QUESTION: Yes.




MR PALLADINO: Last one.




QUESTION: Yeah. So there are thousands have rallied for the sacked prime minister, and the Chinese ambassador was the first one who went and congratulated the incoming prime minister. And do you have information about this, chances or – of violence, and have you – your embassy, your consulates – have you increased your security? Are you looking – what are you looking for the security for the – because of the violence that is expected? And there is already a little bit of violence going on.




MR PALLADINO: Yeah, I don’t have anything specific for you on that today. I don’t, all right.




QUESTION: It is correct, though, Robert, that you are concerned, and you talked about it in Latin America before, creeping Chinese influence all over the place. This is a case where you have a similar situation, or at least allegations of a similar situation. What is the embassy in Colombo doing? I would point out that this is yet another place where there’s a current crisis going on that you talk about from the podium in which the United States does not have an ambassador.




MR PALLADINO: Yeah, we’ve got our Charge, Robert Hilton, as currently in charge. And our ambassador to Sri Lanka and Maldives last week was sworn in and arrives tomorrow. So as of tomorrow we will have an ambassador at the helm.




QUESTION: Okay. But what’s the embassy’s involvement, which is the main part of it?




MR PALLADINO: They’re engaged on this issue. We continue to follow it extremely closely, and we’re concerned. I’ll stop there. Let’s --




QUESTION: Well, Robert, can I just ask if there have been any calls by senior State Department officials to try to --




MR PALLADINO: Nothing to announce today on that, no.




QUESTION: Can I have a follow-up?




MR PALLADINO: Please, go ahead.




QUESTION: You never imagined so many questions about Sri Lanka.




QUESTION: Well, actually this is not about Sri Lanka.




MR PALLADINO: Okay.




QUESTION: Can you confirm reports – well, that there is a meeting next week between the Secretary and North Korean officials?




MR PALLADINO: I have nothing to announce today.




QUESTION: The Secretary said that in a recent interview that there would be a meeting a week – that was a week and a half later – earlier, and that he would meet North Korean officials a week and a half later, which basically puts it at this week or next week. Have those plans been changed, then?




MR PALLADINO: We have nothing new to announce, and nothing beyond what the Secretary previously has said. I have no new travel, no new meetings to announce at this time.




QUESTION: North Korea?




MR PALLADINO: Okay, please. North Korea, continue.




QUESTION: So Steve Biegun in Seoul was quoted as saying that he was eager to begin working-level negotiations with the North Koreans. Is that confirmed, that working-level negotiations have not begun? And if so, what’s the holdup?




MR PALLADINO: He was – he traveled to Seoul on the 29th and 30th, as you point out. And as part of that trip, he was meeting with Republic of Korea counterparts in the Blue House, in the ministry of foreign affairs, and the ministry of unification. And the purpose of the trip was to discuss diplomatic efforts to achieve the final, fully verified denuclearization of North Korea.




As part of that, the two governments agreed on establishing a new working group that would further strengthen our close coordination on our diplomacy, on our denuclearization efforts, on sanctions implementation, and inter-Korean cooperation that comply with the United Nations sanctions. So this is an additional step that we’re taking that Special Representative Biegun and his team will be leading.




QUESTION: And the status of the working-level negotiations with North Korea?




MR PALLADINO: It was – oh, with North Korea. I’m sorry. I have nothing new to announce at this time on meetings between Special Representative Biegun and others.




QUESTION: Follow-up.




MR PALLADINO: Yes. Is this on topic? Sure, please.




QUESTION: Thank you. What are the disagreement between the South Korea and the United States? Do you have any disagreement?




MR PALLADINO: The United States and the Republic of Korea are closely coordinating on our joint approach, denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. We’ll continue to do so.




QUESTION: Do you think South and North Korea relations are going too fast rather than denuclearizations?




MR PALLADINO: We are – we’re closely coordinating on an almost daily basis with our Republic of Korea ally as well as with our Japanese ally, and that’s at all levels of government. Going forward, we’re going to continue this close coordination, because it’s been so key to the success that we’ve had thus far in moving this forward. And that’s going to continue.




QUESTION: Follow-up.




QUESTION: But Moon Jae-in government are offering cash support to North Korea for $10 million recently. They are reopen a U.S. – I mean, open South and North Korea’s liaison office. So how do you think about this case? Do you think that South Korea is violations of sanctions?




MR PALLADINO: No. What I would say is we expect all nations to take their responsibilities seriously to help end North Korea’s illegal nuclear missile program. And sanctions are what got us to where we are today, to this point, were a success, could be possible to moving this forward for a brighter future for the North Korean people. And with our allies and with our partners, we’re going to continue to closely coordinate on our unified approach to this.




QUESTION: Sorry --




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: More on North Korea?




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go right here, please.




QUESTION: Yeah. Follow-up on Lesley’s question. Do you have anything on the veracity of North Korea leader Kim Jong-un’s sister is coming to the United States to meet with Secretary Pompeo? Can we rule in or rule out on that?




MR PALLADINO: I don’t have anything to announce on that today.




QUESTION: And then what is the U.S. position on the request from South Korea to exempt sanctions on inter-Korean economic projects, including allowing South Korean businessmen to visit Kaesong industrial complex?




MR PALLADINO: Yeah, I don't have anything specific on that. I’d have to get back to you on that. All right?




QUESTION: Can I move on to Tibet? Tibet?




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: Let’s move on. Let’s go right here, please.




QUESTION: One more question --




MR PALLADINO: Go ahead, Laurie.




QUESTION: Since June, Iraq has been exporting oil from Kirkuk to Iran. Now that’s ending and Baghdad and the KRG are negotiating a return to using the pipeline to Turkey to export that oil. Were you involved in making Baghdad switch its operations regarding the Kirkuk oil? And are there other major outstanding issues with Iraq in regard to Iran sanctions?




MR PALLADINO: What I’d say, Laurie, is we’ve seen that report, and I would defer to the Government of Iraq to address any discussions that it may have had with other nations. What we’re going to continue to do is discuss our Iran policy with our partners around the world and the implications of our re-imposition of sanctions that were previously lifted or waived under the Iran deal, the so-called Iran deal. Now, we’ve given the same message to all countries around the world that the President has said previously, and that is the United States is fully committed to enforcing all of our sanctions.




QUESTION: So presumably also would welcome a decision like that, which would put Iraq more in compliance with the Iran sanctions, if it’s not exporting oil to Iran but sending it to Turkey instead. You’d welcome that?




MR PALLADINO: I would say that the United States – we are committed to exerting maximum pressure against the Iranian regime in reducing oil to zero. That said, Iraq is a friend, an important partner of the United States, and we’re committed to ensuring their stability and prosperity.




Said, please.




QUESTION: Thank you.




QUESTION: Okay. Can I ask --




MR PALLADINO: That’s all I’ve --




QUESTION: Can I ask about Iran?




MR PALLADINO: Iran?




QUESTION: Yeah.




MR PALLADINO: All right. Stay on Iran.




QUESTION: Can we – has the administration decided to give any waivers to countries importing Iranian oil?




MR PALLADINO: Our goal remains to get to zero oil purchases from Iran as quickly as possible. That’s not changed. And we are determined to implement our policy of maximum pressure on Iran, and that’s our strategy. But we are prepared to work with countries that are reducing their imports on a case-by-case basis. The United States government currently is in the middle of an internal process to consider significant reduction exemptions for individual countries.




QUESTION: Can you tell us which countries those are?




MR PALLADINO: Nothing to announce today.




QUESTION: The 180-day review period for those SREs relief comes to an end on November 4th or 5th. So can we expect an announcement of some sort on that date? Do you have a congressional notification requirement for how those SREs are unveiled?




MR PALLADINO: I have nothing further on that right now.




QUESTION: And tied to --




QUESTION: You don’t know --




MR PALLADINO: Toward Iran?




QUESTION: Yeah.




QUESTION: -- or we just – you don’t know or --




MR PALLADINO: I just have nothing further for you on that right now.




QUESTION: And tied to that, Robert, yesterday the Secretary spoke to his South Korean counterpart. The ministry – the South Korean foreign ministry did a readout of it; this building didn’t. So the South Koreans have asked the United States for maximum flexibility on its request for a waiver regarding the U.S. sanctions against Iran. Can you give us – tell us what that discussion, whether that actual discussion took place, and what was the Secretary’s answer to that?




MR PALLADINO: Yeah. I don’t have a readout of any call that may have taken place yesterday.




QUESTION: Would this waiver for an ally like South Korea be something you would be considering?




MR PALLADINO: I mean, our goal is to get to zero oil. That is our strategy and that’s what we are pursuing. We are prepared to work with countries that are reducing their imports on a case-by-case basis, and I would leave it at that.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: You can’t say whether the call happened?




QUESTION: Can you clarify one point?




MR PALLADINO: I can confirm that the call happened, but I don’t have a readout of that call. I haven’t spoken to the Secretary.




Please.




QUESTION: Can you clarify one point?




MR PALLADINO: Any – yes, please.




QUESTION: You said that it is going to be a country-by-country basis and you are in talks with them, but – and the countries are reducing, but India has recently signed an agreement to import oil from Iran and there is no sign of, as they say, reducing. So where do they stand on the 4th of November?




MR PALLADINO: Our strategy is to encourage zero omissions and that’s across the board. I don’t have any further specifics and I’m not prepared from the podium to give – provide an analysis country by country.




Please, Said.




QUESTION: Yeah. Thank you, Robert. I appreciate this. I want to move to the Palestinian issue --




MR PALLADINO: Okay.




QUESTION: Okay. Well, yesterday, the PLO central committee took a decision to suspend recognition of Israel and withdraw from the Oslo Accord, but left it in the hand of PA President Mahmoud Abbas. First of all, are you aware of this decision?




MR PALLADINO: We are aware of the reports.




QUESTION: Okay, okay. And do you think that the principle of mutual recognition is a good principle in this case between Palestinians and Israelis?




MR PALLADINO: What I would say is we’re aware of reports that the Palestinian Liberation Organization’s central committee voted in support of suspending recognition of Israel. We’d also point out that we’re aware this is not the first time that the PLO central committee has made such a recommendation to President Abbas. For more information on that, I would refer you to the Palestinian Liberation Organization or the Palestinian Authority. The United States position is we continue to urge all parties to engage constructively on how to build a brighter future for the Palestinians and Israel.




QUESTION: I have --




QUESTION: Where exactly would you recommend that we go to talk to a Palestinian Liberation Organization official in Washington these days?




MR PALLADINO: We have – we still have an embassy in Israel, right? And so we are able to talk.




QUESTION: Well --




QUESTION: Can we stay on the embassy?




QUESTION: No, no, no. You referred us to the PLO. I want to know where I can go in Washington to talk to the PLO. And if you’re referring the Palestinians to the embassy in Israel, I mean, that – is that – the whole idea of the consulate in Jerusalem, which is about to be no longer, was that that was the liaison for the Palestinians to go to – go through. Are you saying now that the Palestinians, if they want to talk to an American official in their region, that they have to talk to Ambassador Friedman?




MR PALLADINO: I would say – first of all, I would dispute. We had a merger of our diplomatic facility in Jerusalem and that is – it’s still a fully functioning diplomatic mission that we have, and that remains in touch.




QUESTION: Okay. So there’s a consul general there? My understanding is the consul general position is being --




MR PALLADINO: We announced our intent – we announced our intent to merge.




QUESTION: It’s being --




MR PALLADINO: And that has not taken place yet.




QUESTION: It’s being – but that position of consul general is being eliminated, which means that the Palestinians no longer have a senior --




MR PALLADINO: We have a Palestinian – our – we have an intent to create a Palestinian affairs unit that would provide full services.




QUESTION: But you’re saying, then, that Palestinian officials, if they want to speak to American officials over there, they have to go to the Israeli – the – your embassy to Israel and ambassador, the – who is currently Ambassador Friedman. Is that correct?




MR PALLADINO: We have – it’s possible for us to have diplomatic discussions in a variety of places, but of course our embassy in Israel is – takes the lead.




QUESTION: Yeah, Robert.




MR PALLADINO: Said.




QUESTION: May I just follow up on the issue of the embassy? I know when you announced the merger, you said that it’s to facilitate peace talks and so on. This consulate has been around since the 1800s, like 1860. It’s been around for a long time and it’s always functioned independent of any other embassy. Don’t you think that you are basically shooting the whole paradigm in this process that has been conducted over, like, 150 years or so?




MR PALLADINO: Our decision is driven by our global effort to improve efficiency and effectiveness of our operations, and this in no way signals a change to United States policy on Jerusalem, the West Bank, or the Gaza Strip.




QUESTION: And I promise this is my last question.




MR PALLADINO: All right.




QUESTION: Ambassador Friedman the other day said that he was, and I quote, “an unapologetic right-wing defender of Israel.” Does that – is that, like, diplomatic protocol? Does he clear these statements by you? Are you okay with that?




MR PALLADINO: Said, I believe that was part of a very long speech that he delivered, and I believe – don’t take it out of context. Please take a look at the full speech.




QUESTION: I did not take it out of context. That’s what he said.




MR PALLADINO: He’s referring to his willingness to speak to people, to have – share different points of view, and to approach these kinds of conversations out of respect. So I would just refer you back to the totality of his remarks and the spirit in which they were offered, and I’d leave it at that.




QUESTION: I can assure you that I did, but that was the headline in the Israeli press. So I’m just conveying to you what was written in the Israeli press, and my question to you: Is this fine with you guys? Is this in accordance with DOS diplomatic protocols? I mean --




MR PALLADINO: I would refer – yeah, nothing further on – I would refer you back to the totality of his remarks and the spirit in which they were offered.




QUESTION: Can I follow up briefly?




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: We have more on Israel?




QUESTION: Just briefly.




MR PALLADINO: Yes, Shaun.




QUESTION: The first response on the PLO vote – you said that you’re aware of this. Is there a particular message that you’re giving to Palestinian Authority President Abbas on how to move forward?




MR PALLADINO: Not regarding this vote, other than to say we would continue to urge all parties to engage constructively on how to build a brighter future for both Israel and the Palestinians, and I would refer you to the PLO or PA for any more information on that particular vote.




QUESTION: Cameroon.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: I’m sorry?




QUESTION: (Inaudible.)




QUESTION: Jamal Khashoggi. More than a week ago, the Secretary said he had not heard an audio recording or seen a transcript of Jamal Khashoggi’s killing. Is that still the case?




MR PALLADINO: The White House press secretary addressed this question yesterday, and we’re not going to comment on matters of intelligence from the State Department.




QUESTION: Robert, last week you said that you were continuing to gather all facts but you wanted the investigation to be over as soon as possible. Where would you say that the U.S. is in its assessment of facts, and have you gotten any facts out of, say, the Saudis?




MR PALLADINO: We continue to call for a complete, transparent investigation into this matter, and we continue to gather information both at – in our own data set that the United States has the capabilities to gather as well as to call on our Turkish and Saudi Arabian authorities who are conducting an independent investigation as well. We are going to gather a – full information first.




QUESTION: But in that process, would you say you’re nearing the end of it, or where does it stand? Because --




MR PALLADINO: I’m not going to put a timeline on that. We want to know what happened first, and we will know. We’ll be able to judge. We call for transparency. We’ve already taken some actions, and when more is understood and we get to the bottom, we’ll make judgments based upon that as well.




QUESTION: You’ve condemned very rightly the murder of Khashoggi, but do you also think that Turkish President Erdogan is using the information that Turkey has to – for political purposes of his own?




MR PALLADINO: Turkish investigation is ongoing, and we look forward to receiving a full accounting of what’s transpired. We’ll continue to consider additional measures to hold those responsible accountable – what I would say.




QUESTION: Robert --




MR PALLADINO: Please, Carol.




QUESTION: Robert, could I ask, considering that you and Secretary Pompeo, the State Department has repeatedly called for this thorough, complete, and thorough investigation, and the Saudi story keeps changing, are you satisfied that the Saudis at this point have met their commitment to the Secretary, and have you ever asked them in clear language, “We expect you to tell the truth?”




MR PALLADINO: Purpose of the Secretary of State’s visit two weeks ago was to convey that message and to make sure that our Saudi and Turkish partners understood just how seriously the United States takes this and how we do expect a thorough accounting of what’s transpired.




QUESTION: And they changed their story after that, so are you considering --




MR PALLADINO: More information continues to emerge, and we’re going to judge it in its totality when we have complete information.




Last --




QUESTION: Robert, global opprobrium on the Khashoggi murder resulted in part because he is a journalist. The President this week discussed how journalists are enemies of the people. People up on the podium up there have for decades said that a free press is vital for democracy. Can you help us understand? Those two things seem in conflict. Is a free press vital to democracy, as this department has been saying for decades and decades? Or are members, people in this audience – and perhaps you can point them out – are they enemies of the people? Do you have a list? Because Sarah suggested yesterday that she actually has a list of journalists and institutions that are enemies of the people. Do you have that list? Can you share it with us?




MR PALLADINO: From this podium we have spoken often about a free press, and from the State Department we’ve done the same, and we will continue to advocate for a free press. And this murder that took place is horrible, and we’ve spoken out about that, and we continue to call for a full accounting so that those responsible will be held to justice.




And guys, I’m going to wrap it up. Last one. Last one.




QUESTION: An American dead in Cameroon.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: What’s the question?




QUESTION: I have a question about an American who’s been killed in Cameroon.




QUESTION: Thank you.




MR PALLADINO: Cameroon. Okay.




QUESTION: There are reports that he was killed by Cameroonian security forces. I understand that the State Department is aware of his death, but can you provide us any more information, particularly because he may have been killed by another government?




MR PALLADINO: Let me see if I’ve got anything. I can confirm the death of a United States citizen in Bamenda, Cameroon. And at the Department of State we extend our sincere condolences to family and friends, and we are providing all appropriate consular services. But out of respect for the family during this difficult time, we have nothing further on that right now.




QUESTION: Cameroon is a recipient of U.S. aid, and this was the – of security assistance specifically, and the reports are that this man was killed by the Cameroonian troops. So do you have a message for the government?




MR PALLADINO: I’ll have to take that question, and we can get you more on that.




QUESTION: One question, Robert.




MR PALLADINO: Last one. This is it. Go.




QUESTION: Okay. What’s going on in the – as the migrants approach the U.S. southern border even though there’s a way off? Does the State Department consider that to be an invasion?




MR PALLADINO: We continue to work. We’re in close --




QUESTION: That’s not my question. Is it an invasion?




MR PALLADINO: We’re in close coordination with the Mexican government. We continue to support their efforts. We welcome their decision to work with the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees. And this is something we’re in together from the State Department perspective, and we’re going to continue to work with our partners.




Guys, that’s it. Thank you.




(The briefing was concluded at 2:49 p.m.)









The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

View more on U.S. Department of State's website »
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on October 30, 2018 15:34

October 11, 2018

Department Press Briefings : Department Press Briefing - October 11, 2018

Heather Nauert





Spokesperson


Department Press Briefing





Washington, DC





October 11, 2018











Index for Today's Briefing

DEPARTMENT



MEXICO/HONDURAS/GUATEMALA/EL SALVADOR



AFGHANISTAN



SAUDI ARABIA/TURKEY



MIDDLE EAST PEACE



IRAN/INDIA



TURKEY



DPRK



AFGHANISTAN



PAKISTAN



SAUDI ARABIA/TURKEY



BULGARIA



DEPARTMENT


TRANSCRIPT:







3:18 p.m. EDT










MS NAUERT: Hi, everyone. Good afternoon. A couple of announcements to start off with today, but before I get to that I’d like to say thanks to Robert Palladino for joining us here at the State Department, back at the State Department, and being the deputy spokesman here. As you know, Robert gave his first gaggle off camera yesterday and he did a terrific job. I had the pleasure of sitting in the back of the room for the first time during a briefing, and boy was it intimidating sitting all the way back there and hearing all of your questions. So had I done that before I’d taken this job, I might not have taken this job. (Laughter.) But you did a fantastic job yesterday.




QUESTION: I find that very hard to believe. (Laughter.)




MS NAUERT: You did a fantastic job yesterday. We’re so proud of you and thrilled to have you back here at the State Department.




QUESTION: A-plus.




MS NAUERT: Yeah. Okay. A couple announcements, and then I’d be happy to take your questions.




I’d like to start off by talking about an event that the Secretary attended at the White House earlier today, where he congratulated two Americans who were recognized by President Trump and Secretary Pompeo for their extraordinary work to fight and combat human trafficking. It was the President’s Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons. It was an annual meeting that was held at the White House. It was also attended by Ivanka Trump.




The event is typically chaired by the Secretary of State, but for the first time ever the President attended that event as well. Together, they presented the Presidential Award for Extraordinary Efforts to Combat Trafficking in Persons. Minal Patel Davis, who serves as the mayor of Houston’s special advisor on human trafficking, and William Woolf, a law enforcement officer who helped recover more than 125 victims of human trafficking, were acknowledged for the outstanding impact that they have left on their committees. The Secretary also championed an additional $25 million that was awarded under our program to end modern slavery.




Next – and we’ve had a busy day here at the State Department – the Vice President was here earlier today. He was here this morning to open the Conference on Prosperity and Security in Central America. The Vice President underscored the United States has never been more committed to helping our Central American neighbors tackle the security and economic challenges driving illegal immigration and to building a more prosperous future for the region. Secretary Pompeo is cohosting the two-day event with Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, and our Mexican partners, Foreign Secretary Videgaray, the Secretary of Government Navarrete, and we also welcomed President Hernandez of Honduras, President Morales of Guatemala, and Vice President Ortiz of El Salvador.




As Secretary Pompeo noted this morning, we must all work together to secure our borders, to protect our citizens, and increase opportunities for legitimate businesses to invest in the region. For our part, we know that if our partners in Central America are stronger, the United States will be stronger as well.




Last thing I’d like to address – and today we had a group of young Afghan girls here at the State Department. And many of you may recall last year, a little bit of a controversy with the Afghan robotics team. Eventually those gals were brought into the United States. This year they came back. In celebration of the International Day of the Girl, I’d like to welcome members of the first all-girls Afghan robotics team to the State Department today. The team received the 2018 Gamechangers Award at the Asia Society gala in New York City on Tuesday. They’ve spent the week meeting with several government and NGOs here in Washington. As you may remember, they earned a silver medal at the first global challenge in Washington last summer for a robot that uses solar energy to support small-scale farms in Afghanistan.




We’re thrilled to see them back in Washington and want to offer our congratulations to this inspiring group of young women who represent a promising future generation of empowered Afghan girls and women, and serve as a testament to the resilience of the people of Afghanistan.




And with that, I’d be happy to take your questions.




QUESTION: Yes. Congratulations to them. I assume that they didn’t have the same visa issues this time around as they did last time?




MS NAUERT: They certainly did not. We --




QUESTION: As I recall, it was the President himself who --




MS NAUERT: Who stepped in, yep.




QUESTION: -- intervened and got them their visas.




MS NAUERT: We learned a lesson there.




QUESTION: Okay, good. Well, congratulations to them. Can we start with the whole Jamal Khashoggi case?




MS NAUERT: Sure.




QUESTION: One, is just generally, is there anything new that you can report to us on what your understanding of what happened to him is? And then secondly, the President, in some kind of an interview this morning, said that you guys did have investigators on the ground, and then a Turkish official came around and said no, that’s not correct. Can you fill – what’s the story here?




MS NAUERT: Sure. So to take the second part of your question first, whether or not there are investigators on the ground.




QUESTION: U.S.




MS NAUERT: The United States Government has offered its support to the Turkish Government to provide law enforcement assistance to the Turkish Government. In terms of whether or not we have people on the ground, that’s not something that I can address here from this podium. That’s not something that the State Department does. I’d have to refer you to some of our other government agencies that could or would be involved with that, such as Department of Justice and others.




QUESTION: Right. But there are regional security DS officers on the ground already.




MS NAUERT: Yeah.




QUESTION: They’ve been – they’re always there. Do – you can’t say if they’re --




MS NAUERT: We do have that. Our Diplomatic Security officers, to my knowledge, don’t handle those types of investigations. They handle State Department matters only.




QUESTION: And then the first part of the question. Is there anything --




MS NAUERT: Anything new on --




QUESTION: -- new in terms of your understanding or lack of understanding of what happened to --




MS NAUERT: Yeah. And I think it’s something that’s really important to keep in perspective. As we have said from the beginning, we are not certain about what happened to Jamal Khashoggi. The Secretary released a statement earlier this week. The Vice President has talked about this. The President has talked about this. We are all concerned about his whereabouts. We don’t have any information on his whereabouts right now or what happened to him. As you can see, anytime you turn on the news or you open the newspaper there is a lot of speculation, and there are a ton of rumors out there. We are making determinations and watching this for facts. We don’t have the facts yet. And so we are going to hold back on our comments until we have concrete information that the U.S. Government can share. We don’t have that information at this point right now. An investigation, as our understanding is, is underway, and we’re not going to get ahead of that.




QUESTION: Okay. Last two, but they’re part – the same, kind of the same question. The Turks and the – Turkey has announced that they’re going to join in or take part in a – some kind of working group with the Saudis to shed light on what happened. Is this something that you might be involved in or is it something that you would welcome? And then secondly, I just wanted to follow up on a question I asked Robert yesterday.




MS NAUERT: Well, let me just take that part, because we welcome a thorough and transparent investigation, and we’ve been extremely clear about that. I can also add another piece of information, that we have communicated with the Saudi ambassador to the United States. It’s my understanding that he is on his way back to Saudi Arabia. We have said to him that we expect information upon his return to the United States. When and if we have additional information to bring you, we will bring it to you right away.




QUESTION: But he’s on – is your understanding – did you tell him that he better get his --




MS NAUERT: We absolutely did not. That was not at our --




QUESTION: But you’ve told him not --




MS NAUERT: That was not at our direction. I can’t speak on behalf of that government, but I can tell you that I’m told that he’s headed back to that – to his home country, and we expect some information when he gets back.




QUESTION: Have you told him not to bother coming back unless he has an explanation?




MS NAUERT: Matt, no. No.




QUESTION: All right. And then --




MS NAUERT: I’m not going to get ahead of things. I mean, look, the U.S. Government is extremely concerned about this situation. This has the highest attention at the highest levels of the United States Government.




QUESTION: I’m not trying to make light of it. I just want to know, have you told him that, look, when you get back here you better have a – you better have an explanation for --




MS NAUERT: We would like some information. We certainly would, and I don’t think we’ve been shy about that.




QUESTION: All right. And then last one, and I’ll shut up. Yesterday I asked Robert and other people did too about this – reports about intelligence that you guys may or may not – or reports that you did have intelligence that there would be some – there might be some harm that came to him. He gave a kind of cryptic answer at first, said that you had no advance notice of his disappearance. And then when I pushed him and said does that mean you didn’t have any advance notice that anything bad might happen to him, not disappearance necessarily, he said we had no advance notice. So I just want to clarify. Does that you mean you had no advance notice of – or no intelligence or any information about anything that might or possibly could happen to him at the consulate?




MS NAUERT: Almost never do you hear us talk about matters of intelligence here at the State Department.




QUESTION: Yeah. But --




MS NAUERT: I’m not going to get into those matters of intelligence. An investigation is underway.




QUESTION: But he did yesterday.




MS NAUERT: I have nothing to add beyond what Robert said yesterday here from that podium. But we are going to let this investigation take place. The United States Government will continue to offer its support. We will provide information based on facts, based on information that we have. And when we don’t have facts, we won’t bring them to you. I would just be mindful of the speculation and a lot of rumors that are out there, and let’s wait until we can get some solid information.




Okay. Lesley, go ahead.




QUESTION: Thank you very much. I just want to come back to the Saudi ambassador. He’s gone with a message from Washington back to Riyadh? Or was he recalled?




MS NAUERT: No. And that’s what I just said. My understanding is that he’s on his way back there. We said when you come back we’d like to hear – get a report from you.




QUESTION: Right. And so the message from the U.S. is like – is from him – bring us what the Saudis know or the outcome of an investigation or --




MS NAUERT: I’m not going to get ahead of an investigation.




QUESTION: I’m just a little confused.




MS NAUERT: No, there’s no reason to be confused about this, okay.




QUESTION: Right.




MS NAUERT: Because there is an investigation underway.




QUESTION: Correct.




MS NAUERT: We’re not going to get ahead of that investigation. We will let that investigation play out. I know there are a lot of people who want answers at this point, understandably so. But we’re not going to get ahead of those investigations. And so bring us whatever information you have when you return, and we’ll go from there.




QUESTION: Is that above what the Secretary as well as Bolton then discussed with the crown prince yesterday?




MS NAUERT: I’m sorry. Is that “above”? What does that mean?




QUESTION: Meaning so yesterday Bolton – two institutions in the government spoke to MBS yesterday, the Crown Prince. Were they not satisfied with what they were told and therefore the ambassador’s got to come back?




MS NAUERT: I wouldn’t assume that at all. Look, obviously we have multiple agencies and departments in the United States Government that are paying close attention to this issue. So I would not make the assumption that we didn’t get satisfactory answers and therefore required another level of communication to go in.




QUESTION: Another level, correct.




MS NAUERT: Okay. This is an – obviously an interagency effort. Okay?




Said, go right ahead.




QUESTION: I want to move on.




MS NAUERT: Okay.




QUESTION: I have another question, though.




MS NAUERT: Hold on. Okay. Goodness gracious.




QUESTION: Okay. Because I wanted to move on, they want – yeah.




MS NAUERT: Okay.




QUESTION: I want to talk about --




MS NAUERT: Look, I don't have much more for you on that, and we’re not going to let this go on and on, because we’re sticking to the facts here and I’m not going to speculate.




Said, I'll be happy to come right back to you. Rich, go ahead.




QUESTION: Okay. Okay. All right.




QUESTION: Heather, do you know if the Saudi ambassador left because of this incident, or was he planning on going --




MS NAUERT: Okay, third time.




QUESTION: This --




MS NAUERT: Third time. We did not request that he would go.




QUESTION: Okay, but --




MS NAUERT: He went over there – my understanding, he’s going over there, but any additional information on that I’d have to refer you to the Saudi Government. We simply said: When you come back, provide us a report, provide us a readout of what you've learned.




QUESTION: And who spoke with him from State?




MS NAUERT: I don't have any information for you on that. But we've had exchanges at multiple levels at the State Department.




Hi, Abbie.




QUESTION: He asked just one part of my question, but the other question was: Reporters Without Borders requested or asked that the UN step in to have an investigation into this. Is that something that the U.S. would support?




MS NAUERT: I'm not aware of it. You’re telling me about that. That's the first I'm hearing of it, so I don't have any comment on it.




QUESTION: Generally speaking do you have any comment on the UN --




MS NAUERT: I'm not going to comment. I’m just not aware of that.




Okay. Yeah.




QUESTION: Heather, just the reaction on the Hill? There have been some calls on the Hill already saying that arms assistance, for example, defense assistance should be at risk because of this. The President spoke about that today. Is it the position of the State Department that that's not on the table, that --




MS NAUERT: I think you’re jumping to conclusions. This is entirely a hypothetical situation at this point. We don't know what happened. We don’t have the facts of the case. We want to learn what happened. The President has said that. The Secretary of State has said that. Ambassador Bolton has said that as well. So let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Understandably, it – it’s understandable that Congress and others are concerned, but let’s not get ahead of ourselves on that point. Okay?




Okay, Barbara.




QUESTION: But it's not entirely hypothetical. I mean the guy’s missing.




QUESTION: So the Senators yesterday --




MS NAUERT: No, absolutely. We don’t know what happened, okay. Let’s wait and determine what happened.




Barbara, go ahead.




QUESTION: Also about the Hill. Republican senators yesterday were going and looking at U.S. intelligence related to this case, and Bob Corker said it looked – it made the Turkish accounts look quite convincing. So --




MS NAUERT: Barbara, I wouldn't have – I would not have anything on that. We don’t do intelligence.




QUESTION: So – no. No. I’m just – I’m wondering if Secretary Pompeo has seen the same --




MS NAUERT: Pardon me?




QUESTION: Has Secretary Pompeo seen the same intelligence?




MS NAUERT: Barbara, we don't do intelligence out of this building. We do diplomacy.




Okay, Said, go right ahead.




QUESTION: Can I just ask you one more question on --




QUESTION: But intelligent diplomacy.




MS NAUERT: Intelligent – we try to do intelligent diplomacy.




QUESTION: Which is one clarifying question as well. There’s been a lot of speculation or reporting on what Mr. Khashoggi's immigration status is. Can you clarify at all whether or not he’s a lawful permanent resident, if he’s on a visa, anything like that?




MS NAUERT: I think – well, we don’t discuss visa applications. I don’t have anything additional for you beyond what we've already discussed on this on his status.




Okay, Said, go right ahead.




QUESTION: Okay, great. Very quickly on the Palestinian issue. Yesterday, Secretary Pompeo at the award dinner said that, “Israel is everything we want the entire Middle East to look like going forward.” What does that mean?




MS NAUERT: Well, I think it means a lot of things.




QUESTION: Yeah, what is it?




MS NAUERT: One, recognizing that we have a strong partner that is a democracy, that is prosperous. It is a country that desires peace. Something that you all will appreciate, they have a free press and a very vibrant press at that, and a free market economy. Those are all good things that we look to when we see other nations around the world that are stable that we look to as sort of a beacon of hope in that sense. And I think that's exactly what the Secretary was referring to in his speech.




QUESTION: But Israel occupies another people --




MS NAUERT: Pardon me?




QUESTION: It occupies another people. It imprisons them. It has checkpoints all over whole territory. It imprisons journalists. It does all kinds of terrible things – confiscates land, does all kind of things. You are telling the --




MS NAUERT: It is a fact that it is a democratic.




QUESTION: Right.




MS NAUERT: It is a fact that it is prosperous.




QUESTION: Right.




MS NAUERT: It is a fact that they have a free press. It is a fact that they have a free market economy that is strong. Those are all good things. Every nation on this globe has issues and areas where they could do a lot better. The United States included in that, okay.




QUESTION: So you would like to see, let’s say, Lebanon sort of duplicate what Israel is? Okay.




MS NAUERT: I think – I think Israel is a strong model in that regard.




QUESTION: Couple – couple more things. Couple more things. Is there any news regarding Lara Alqasem? Is there anything on that?




MS NAUERT: I believe she has a hearing that’s scheduled tomorrow. You’re referring to the American citizen.




QUESTION: Right.




MS NAUERT: She has a hearing that is scheduled for tomorrow. We provide consular services to American citizens elsewhere. My understanding is that we will have someone either accompany her or be present at that hearing. Beyond that, I don't have anything more for you.




QUESTION: And I promise lastly, yesterday at the closure of the PLO office, the community was out there and their concern is that they have – as American citizens, they also are Palestinians, and they have issues of deeds, land, and so on that they used to do through this PLO office. Now they don’t know what to do about it, how they claim their land, how to get permits, how to do all kinds of things. Does the State Department – you don't have to answer me now, but if you have an answer to this issue that where they should turn to. Like, is it a third country that the PLO can name or you can name?




MS NAUERT: So the operations were required to cease by October the 10th. That is accurate. We’re not in a position to speak about where those individuals should go to seek that advice about their deeds, their properties back home. The Palestinian Authority has – perhaps has that information, and I would encourage people to contact the Palestinian Authority.




QUESTION: Heather?




MS NAUERT: Hi, Laurie.




QUESTION: Hi. On the Iranian sanctions, there’s a new round set to take effect in November, and Iraq has been asking for a waiver. What is your position on that?




MS NAUERT: Well, overall with regard to those sanctions that will take effect on November 4th – and you’re referring to the oil sanctions for Iran and countries that choose to continue purchasing oil from Iran – we have conversations with many partners and allies around the world about those sanctions. We make our policies very clear to those countries. We continue to have conversations with the Government of Iraq about that particular issue and the implications for the reimposition of sanctions that were previously lifted or even waived under the JCPOA.




We’ve given the same message to all countries around the world, and the President has said, and that’s that the United States is committee to re-enforcing all of our sanctions. We believe that countries coming together and recognizing the malign influence that Iran has had around the world is important. We know that Iran and the Government of Iran has taken the benefits that it received under the JCPOA and they’ve poured that money not into their own population, not into the good of the people, not into its medical hospitals and things of that nature, but rather they’ve used it for its own nefarious programs.




QUESTION: That sounds like you’re saying no to the Iraqis. Is that --




MS NAUERT: I’m not forecasting anything. You know we don’t forecast that kind of stuff anyway. Okay.




QUESTION: Can I have a quick follow-up on that?




MS NAUERT: Hold on, let’s move on.




QUESTION: I have a follow-up on that.




MS NAUERT: Yes, go right ahead.




QUESTION: Yes. So what is your stand with India placing fresh orders now despite the threat of these U.S. sanctions? And the U.S. has – you have said from this that you are trying to find alternative suppliers for them and all that. Because on Monday the oil minister said that the two state refineries, not the private ones, have placed orders for importing crude oil from Iran in next month.




MS NAUERT: I’ve seen that report. As you all know, we were recently in India where that was a topic of conversation with the Indian Government. The President had addressed it – I believe it was just earlier today – which he was asked about that question about whether or not India would buy oil from Iran after sanctions are reimposed. And the President said – and I’m not going to get ahead of the President, certainly – but he said we’ll take care of that. He was asked also about CAATSA sanctions and the imposition of – possible imposition of CAATSA sanctions. And he said, you know, India is going to find out. And India will find out. We’ll see. So I’m not going to get ahead of him, but certainly when we hear about things such as purchasing oil or purchasing of the S-400 systems, it’s not helpful. The United States Government just reviews that very carefully.




QUESTION: I would like you to find what – or explain what the President was saying. But when he said India will find out, or we will take care of it, do you see a threat? Do you see a friendly, like, okay, we’ll let them do it or we will take care of it?




MS NAUERT: Well, the President doesn’t like to forecast his actions. I can’t speak for the President. I’d just have to refer you back to the White House.




QUESTION: Really?




MS NAUERT: Pardon?




QUESTION: He pretty much has done everything that he said he was going to do on the campaign. (Laughter.)




MS NAUERT: Hi, Cindy. How are you?




QUESTION: Heather, a question on – please, forgive me, but --




MS NAUERT: On this in particular?




QUESTION: This – no, this is another major news headline of the day.




MS NAUERT: Okay, hold --




QUESTION: And it’s Brunson.




MS NAUERT: I will come back to you.




QUESTION: And I think we need to address that.




MS NAUERT: Hold on. I’d be more than happy to, of course.




QUESTION: Thank you.




MS NAUERT: Lesley, I’ve already come to you. Let me try to make it around the room.




QUESTION: I know.




MS NAUERT: And I promise you I will come back to you.




QUESTION: Thank you. We need to get to those.




MS NAUERT: Okay, let me go to Cindy with VOA.




QUESTION: I can’t ask about --




MS NAUERT: She has not had a question yet today.




QUESTION: Go for it. Please.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MS NAUERT: Oh my goodness. (Laughter.)




QUESTION: Yes, thank you. I was also going to ask about --




MS NAUERT: Let’s share. Let’s share, kids.




QUESTION: Right.




MS NAUERT: Okay. Cindy, go right ahead.




QUESTION: Any updates on Pastor Brunson?




MS NAUERT: Oh, Lesley, she stole your question. (Laughter.) Oh, I’m so sorry.




QUESTION: She saw my page.




MS NAUERT: In all seriousness, as you all know, this is a case that the entire U.S. Government has followed very, very closely. Pastor Brunson has been under house arrest and prior to that imprisonment for far too long. The Secretary gave a speech last evening in which he spoke about Pastor Brunson’s case. As many of you are well aware, Pastor Brunson has a hearing that’s scheduled for tomorrow. Our folks from our embassy in Turkey have been very engaged in this case, have been providing assistance and support in any way that we can for Pastor Brunson and his family.




Let me also take this opportunity to remind you that we have locally employed staff who have also been detained, in addition to the NASA scientist who is still in Turkey as well, who is an American citizen. All of those cases have our – the United States Government’s tremendous concern and we are watching those carefully.




Now, Pastor Brunson’s case happens to be tomorrow. We don’t have any further information on it other than that the Secretary spoke yesterday, and he said it’s the right thing for them to do to release Pastor Brunson. It’s the humanitarian thing to do for Turkey to release him. I’m hopeful that before too long he and his wife will be able to return to the United States. That would be an important step forward for the U.S. and Turkish relationship.




I don’t have anything for you other than that, but we look forward to watching the case very carefully tomorrow.




QUESTION: But can you – can you either confirm or knock down a report from NBC that there is a deal?




MS NAUERT: Yeah, I am not aware of any such deal. I’m not aware of any such deal that has been reported by NBC News.




QUESTION: Thank you.




MS NAUERT: Okay.




QUESTION: Well whether you’re aware of it or not, is it possible there is one?




MS NAUERT: I’m not aware of anything. That’s all – I can only speak about what I’m aware of and what we do out of this building. We are not aware of anything. There is a hearing that takes place tomorrow. There is a legal process that still plays out. We’ll be there in support of Pastor Brunson and his family at that hearing.




QUESTION: Are you aware of the – if the Secretary has spoken to his Turkish counterpart today or plans to?




MS NAUERT: I do not have any information on whether or not the Secretary has any calls of that nature. We have engaged with the Turkish Government on many levels in the past about this case and we’re watching it carefully, but I don’t have any call lists for the Secretary. Okay.




QUESTION: Heather?




MS NAUERT: Hi, Janne.




QUESTION: Hi. Thank you, Heather. Maybe you can answer or not these issues – I hope. It is reported that North Korean Kim Jong-un rejected – heavily rejected the U.S. interpreter at Secretary Pompeo and North Korea Kim Jong-un’s official meeting at the Pyongyang.




MS NAUERT: Could I – I’m sorry. Could I ask you to just repeat that first part about Chairman Kim?




QUESTION: Chairman Kim has rejected U.S. interpreters at Pompeo and Kim Jong-un’s meeting. So why North Korean Kim Jong-un rejected U.S. interpreter? That is the --




MS NAUERT: I’d have to refer you back to that government to get an answer on that, but we feel that we were well represented in that meeting with Secretary Pompeo, with Special Representative Steve Biegun, and we also had a colleague of ours in the room who speaks fluent Korean. So we feel that we were well supported in those meetings.




QUESTION: But periodically, you may need both sides interpreter. Why he need their own side? Why they don’t want it, the United States side interpreter? That is not fair.




MS NAUERT: We had equal numbers of people in that room having those meetings, and we feel fully confident that those meetings were fully understood, not only by the United States side but I believe by the North Korean side as well.




QUESTION: How do you understanding the North Korean Kim Jong-un’s Korean saying? You probably --




MS NAUERT: Well, I certainly wouldn’t.




QUESTION: Yes.




MS NAUERT: But my colleagues who were in the room who speak Korean would. Okay.




QUESTION: All right. Thank you.




MS NAUERT: Next question. Anything – anybody else have something on North Korea? Boy, since when are you all not interested in North Korea? Okay. Lalit, go right ahead.




QUESTION: First a quick follow-up on Iran.




MS NAUERT: Okay.




QUESTION: Has India requested for a waiver on Iranian oil?




MS NAUERT: I think I already addressed that.




QUESTION: You (inaudible). And secondly, India has – Saudis supplying additional oil to India from next month onwards. Is it part of the U.S. request to Saudis to --




MS NAUERT: Saudi Arabia sent oil to India? I wouldn’t have – I don’t have any --




QUESTION: Is Saudi Arabia releasing more oils to India next month?




MS NAUERT: I’m afraid I don’t have any information for you on that. Okay.




QUESTION: Okay. And then I have two more questions on South Asia, one on Afghanistan. Ambassador Khalilzad is in Saudi Arabia right now. Before, he was in Afghanistan, Pakistan. Has he made any headway in the peace talks?




MS NAUERT: Well, I think any time we’re there on the ground we’re making headway. And the fact that we have a special envoy whose main job is to bird-dog this issue – sort of an American term, forgive me for that – but to fight for this issue every single day, to work hard on this issue with his team, that’s important. I think that’s a step forward. He has a lengthy trip to the region. He was just in Afghanistan. He spent some time in some other countries. He will head back to Afghanistan at some point before the end of his trip, I believe to give the Afghan Government a complete readout of his entire travels.




The purpose of this entire trip is to talk about the peace and reconciliation progress. This is something that will be Afghan led, Afghan owned, but supported by the U.S. Government. So anything beyond that, I don’t have, but I can tell you that he is meeting with a wide range of folks on the ground, from – or, excuse me – from President Ghani to the Chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah, political groups, the High Peace Council, Afghan media, and also civil society.




QUESTION: And one on Pakistan. Pakistan had reached out to IMF for bailout package of around $8 billion. I know Secretary Pompeo had commented on this few months ago, expressing his revisions on under what conditions IMF will give bailout package to Pakistan. What the U.S. has to say now?




MS NAUERT: Sure. So we understand that Pakistan has formally requested assistance from the International Monetary Fund. In all cases, we examine that closely from all angles of it, including Pakistan’s debt position, in evaluating any type of loan program. This is something that we’ve been tracking fairly closely. The Secretary had spoken about this a few months back, I know, in some interviews not that long ago. I think part of the reason that Pakistan found itself in this situation is Chinese debt and the fact that there is debt that governments have incurred that they maybe thought wouldn’t be so tough to bail themselves out of, but has become increasingly tough. So – last question and then I’ve got to go.




QUESTION: I just want to --




QUESTION: I got two, but go over there, but I have --




MS NAUERT: Abbie, go ahead.




QUESTION: -- two that I need to get done before the end of the week.




QUESTION: I have one more question on the subject here at the top. Yesterday, there was a call for senators triggering the Global Magnitsky Act. Can you say what role the State Department would play in that and if there’s any comment generally on the letter that was sent by the senators saying that there was a need for this investigation.




MS NAUERT: Yeah. So Global Magnitsky is a human rights legislation, a law that is imposed or goes into effect for certain countries under certain circumstances.




QUESTION: (Sneezes.)




MS NAUERT: Bless you, Rich. That is something that – we don’t have enough information at this point. So I understand that Congress may be interested in that, in a Global Magnitsky investigation, but we don’t know the facts of this case just yet. So I think they’re getting ahead of themselves at this point. We will watch the situation very carefully, very closely, wait for the facts to come out, and then we’ll get there.




To answer your question, though, about what State Department’s role is in that, State Department, Department of Justice, and also the Department of Treasury under the Office of Foreign Assets Control would all play some sort of a role in this.




QUESTION: Heather, can I get --




MS NAUERT: Okay. Go ahead, Matt.




QUESTION: -- two very briefly? Just – one is we’ve been talking a lot about the Khashoggi case and as you say, you don’t know what happened.




MS NAUERT: Right.




QUESTION: There is a case with another journalist in Europe, actually, though, who we do know what happened. She was raped and murdered in Bulgaria, and I’m wondering if you guys – I don’t think you’ve been asked about this yet.




MS NAUERT: No, we’ve not yet discussed it.




QUESTION: So do you have any comment or reaction to this?




MS NAUERT: Well, sure. I woke up this morning, I saw that story about this young woman working so hard and something so horrible happened to her. I’d like to start out by expressing my condolences to her and her family and her colleagues who certainly are heartbroken by this loss. We don’t know what the motivation was for the person who did this to her, so I don’t want to jump to conclusions that she was targeted because of her profession. I think the investigators are not at that point yet where they can – that – where they can make that assertion. So for now, I’m just going to be able to express our deepest condolences for the loss of this Bulgarian woman.




QUESTION: All right. And then secondly, I want to go back to something that is of great interest to you and the Secretary, at least in the past couple of days, in this ongoing war of statements between you and the Secretary and Senator Menendez over State Department appointments.




After the statement that came out last night from the Secretary, which again blamed Menendez and his – Senator Menendez and fellow Democrats for holding up the nominations, Senator Menendez’s office came back again with basically a restatement of the – of his office’s denial of the first one. And I just – I think everyone can sympathize with the Secretary and the fact that he – that the appointments aren’t going as speedily as possible or as they possibly could.




But one of the points that Senator Menendez’s office makes is that it is a myth that only Democrats have opposed Trump administration nominees. Isn’t that a true statement? Isn’t that fair? There have been nominees who have – are currently being held up and have actually had to have been withdrawn because of Republican opposition to them. You have a situation --




MS NAUERT: Let’s keep this in perspective, all right? First of all, we have more than 60 nominees who have not been voted through the Senate at this point. Some of them have holds on them right now.




QUESTION: Right.




MS NAUERT: The Senate had said to the Secretary when he first came in, when he was going through his confirmation hearings – sir, will you staff up the State Department. You remember the conversations, all of you, that we had one year ago. The flood of people leaving the State Department, State Department demoralized, Black Friday – you remember that one as well – Foggy Bottom is burning. You remember all those headlines. This Secretary came in and he said I’m going to change things. In order to do --




QUESTION: Well, are you saying all those are true? (Laughter.)




MS NAUERT: Hold on, hold on. In order to do my job, in order for the State Department to do its job on behalf of the 75,000 people who work for the State Department around the world, let’s get our field – our team on the field. And this Secretary has prioritized that. He’s brought in a counselor who is working nonstop to get that team on the field. The Secretary said in that confirmation hearing, I will get my team on the field, U.S. senators, but I will also need your help. When there are more than 60 people who are not getting through the Senate, the Senate is not doing its job. And there are some members in particular who are holding them up.




QUESTION: Okay.




MS NAUERT: Now, are there some who have hit some hurdles because senators have additional questions or maybe they don’t like them, maybe they feel like they are not qualified? Sure, there are a handful, as there would be in any administration. But by and large, of the 60-some people who have not gotten through the Senate, the vast majority of them are senior Foreign Service officers. These are the career professionals who work for the State Department, who are trying to get out in the field to go be the ambassadors of – Robert, help me fill in the countries – Togo. They need an ambassador. Our ambassador is still hanging out in the Senate. We’d like to get our ambassador to Togo. Help me out with some of the other countries.




STAFF: Equatorial Guinea.




MS NAUERT: Equatorial Guinea. We need to get our person into Equatorial Guinea. Give me another one.




STAFF: Panama.




MS NAUERT: Panama. We need to get our ambassador into Panama.




QUESTION: Okay. So --




MS NAUERT: And I’m sure those countries want their ambassadors. So the Senate needs to do its job, get our people through. In addition to those Foreign Service officers I just mentioned – again, the vast majority of those 60-some people who have not been pushed through yet – we do have political appointees. We need an under secretary for management. Management, under secretary, there are only a handful of under secretaries here, seven or so at the State Department. We need someone to permanently run management. Get these people through. Put them up for a vote so the State Department can conduct the diplomacy it needs to do on behalf of the American people.




QUESTION: Okay. Well listen, I am not going to denigrate the international importance and significance of Togo and Equatorial Guinea and the role that they play as it – related to U.S. foreign policy. But I think first of all that Menendez, his office takes issue with the more than 60 – he says it’s 56 – and also says, I mean, what about nominating people for Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Australia, Mexico, Pakistan, Egypt, Singapore? These are countries that, with all due respect to Togo and Equatorial Guinea, are also important to U.S. priorities.




MS NAUERT: And you are – Matt, you’re absolutely right. Let me finish.




QUESTION: I would say that – I would say that --




MS NAUERT: Let me finish. Hold on.




QUESTION: Well let me finish my question. I was --




MS NAUERT: You are absolutely right about that.




QUESTION: All right.




MS NAUERT: How often do you hear that? (Laughter.) Not at home, not at home at least, right?




QUESTION: Hear – my God, I think that is the first time I’ve ever heard that from this podium. (Laughter.)




MS NAUERT: No you’re – Matt, you are right about that. Pakistan --




QUESTION: But you haven’t nominated anyone for those.




MS NAUERT: -- Turkey – hold on. Those countries deserve an ambassadorial nominee. And I can tell you --




QUESTION: Right, and you guys got them – but you guys have to nominate someone.




MS NAUERT: I can tell you those two countries in particular, we have people in the pipeline.




QUESTION: Yes.




MS NAUERT: Now as you all know --




QUESTION: But they haven’t been nominated.




MS NAUERT: -- the nominations are actually announced out of the White House. So we don’t make those announcements here from the State Department. But we have people through the pipe – going through the pipeline right now. It’s a lengthy process. I went through it myself when I became spokesperson. Background investigations, financial disclosures, ethics reports. It takes a long, long time, and there’s a lot of information that you have to go back and fill in again.




QUESTION: All right, but Heather --




MS NAUERT: It’s a lengthy process. We’ve got people identified. We’re pushing to get them through just as quickly as possible.




QUESTION: Heather, but you had – you cannot deny that you had a nominee for assistant secretary of state for East Asia, a very important area, South China Sea, all this stuff, who had to withdraw because a Republican senator said that he would do – this is Senator Rubio of Florida – would do everything he possibly could to stop her nomination. You have a situation, a crisis that the Vice President – that everybody talks about it all the time – in Venezuela which is absolutely awful. The country next door to that, Colombia, there’s a career Foreign Service officer who is being held up by a Republican senator.




MS NAUERT: There are some --




QUESTION: Is that not true?




MS NAUERT: There are some cases, yes, where --




QUESTION: Are those cases true? Okay.




MS NAUERT: -- where a few members on the Hill --




QUESTION: So --




MS NAUERT: Let me finish. You asked --




QUESTION: It’s not all Menendez’s fault.




MS NAUERT: It is largely the fault of Senator Menendez. I’m sorry.




QUESTION: Okay. All right.




MS NAUERT: Let’s get those folks to do their job so we can get the team on the field. We need to get it done. Okay. Thanks, everybody, we’ll see you soon.




(The briefing was concluded at 3:53 p.m.)




DPB # 52









The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

View more on U.S. Department of State's website »
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on October 11, 2018 15:42

October 10, 2018

Department Press Briefings : Department Press Briefing - October 10, 2018

Robert Palladino





Deputy Spokesperson


Department Press Briefing





Washington, DC




October 10, 2018
Index for Today's Briefing

CONFERENCE ON PROSPERITY AND SECURITY IN CENTRAL AMERICA



SECURITY DAY



TURKEY/SAUDI ARABIA



VENEZUELA



TURKEY/SAUDI ARABIA



ISRAEL/PALESTINIANS



TURKEY/SAUDI ARABIA



AFGHANISTAN



DEPARTMENT



NORTH KOREA



TURKEY/SAUDI ARABIA



SOUTH KOREA/JAPAN



IPCC



VENEZUELA


TRANSCRIPT:







1:41 p.m. EDT




MR PALLADINO: Something for the top. Looking ahead to tomorrow, we are honored to have the Vice President here at the State Department tomorrow to open the second Conference on Prosperity and Security in Central America. Secretary Pompeo is co-hosting this two-day event with the Department of Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen and our Mexican partners, Foreign Secretary Videgaray, and the Secretary of Government Navarrete.




We also look forward to welcoming President Hernandez of Honduras, President Morales of Guatemala, and Vice President Ortiz of El Salvador. Together, we will be reviewing and strengthening our joint efforts to achieve prosperity, security, and governance in Central America.




At tomorrow’s Prosperity Day, our discussion will focus on promoting economic opportunity in the region. Our collective goal is to ensure that the people of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras are able to build futures for their families, communities, and countries.




And then on Friday, Security Day, which will be hosted by the Department of Homeland Security at the United States Institute of Peace with participation by the State Department’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement as well as the United States Agency for International Development, we are going to discuss joint efforts to enhance regional security cooperation, reduce illegal immigration, combat organized crime and gangs, and improve citizen security.




Our cooperation is key to a strong, vibrant, prosperous, and secure Central America and Western Hemisphere. We look forward to productive discussions with our Mexican, Salvadoran, Guatemalan, and Honduran partners as we work together for the prosperity and security of our citizens.




And that’s it. Why don’t we open it up to questions.




QUESTION: Sir.




MR PALLADINO: Sure.




QUESTION: Thanks. Welcome.




MR PALLADINO: Thank you.




QUESTION: I hope this is the first of many occasions that we see you behind the podium, at least that’s what I say now before any questions have been answered.




MR PALLADINO: All right.




QUESTION: Let’s start with the whole situation in Turkey with Mr. Khashoggi and the Saudis. We’ve all seen, I think – at least most of us have seen the White House statement about the calls that went out, which you’re more than welcome to repeat if you want, but I want to ask you about a specific line in one report about this that said that the U.S. had intelligence, overheard or intercepted communications, suggesting that there was a threat to Mr. Khashoggi should he go. Is that correct?




MR PALLADINO: I’ll get to that question, and I’ll answer it directly, Matt, thank you. I would just – I would start at the top by saying, as the President has conveyed, both the Vice President and the Secretary of State, we – the United States is concerned by Jamal Khashoggi’s disappearance. And we can confirm that Ambassador Bolton and Jared Kushner have spoken to the crown prince yesterday, and we can confirm as well that the Secretary of State then had a follow-up call with the crown prince to reiterate our request for more information. We continue to call for a transparent investigation, and we’re going to continue to monitor this situation.




As to your specific question regarding intelligence, I would say that although I cannot comment on intelligence matters, I can say definitively the United States had no advanced knowledge of Jamal Khashoggi’s disappearance.




QUESTION: Well, okay, that’s a bit different than – I mean, did you have any advance knowledge that there might be some kind of threat to him should he go into the consulate in Istanbul?




MR PALLADINO: We had no advanced knowledge.




QUESTION: Okay. If you had had – based on that report that you did have knowledge, there was a lot of talk about how the administration, if it did have such information, would have been required to have warned him – Mr. Khashoggi – about that. Is that your understanding of the “No Double Standard” rule or regulation?




MR PALLADINO: It’s a hypothetical question and --




QUESTION: Well, in any case --




MR PALLADINO: Without going into – and we’re not going to discuss --




QUESTION: Forget about this case. Let’s just talk about if the United States Government has information about a threat to an American citizen or American resident, are you required to tell them about it?




MR PALLADINO: I would need to understand clearly before commenting upon the “No Double Standard”, what applies to us. And so I know it definitely applies to American citizens, but I don’t want to go into any further speculation on what it stands for.




QUESTION: So you’re not sure if it would apply – if it would have applied in this case?




MR PALLADINO: What I would say is we’ve seen the report; and although I can’t go into intelligence matters, I can definitively say that we had no knowledge in advance of Mr. Khashoggi’s disappearance.




QUESTION: Robert, can I just follow up?




MR PALLADINO: Yes. Okay, please, let’s start over with Reuters. Yes.




QUESTION: Well, first of all, you said that Jared Kushner and Bolton spoke to the crown prince. Did they not speak to MBS?




MR PALLADINO: That’s all I have. I would refer you to the White House for any further information on calls that may have taken place.




QUESTION: MBS (inaudible) prince.




QUESTION: Okay, but who did Pompeo speak to? The same person?




MR PALLADINO: Yes.




QUESTION: Oh, okay.




QUESTION: But the fact that it’s been more than a week now, and obviously all of these high-level contacts have gone on, and there’s still no indication of what happened to this guy inside the Saudi consulate, this must be frustrating for the State Department.




MR PALLADINO: I would say that we continue to see conflicting reports on what has transpired, and the United States – our position – it is absolutely essential that Turkish authorities, with full and transparent support from the Government of Saudi Arabia, that they are able to conduct a thorough investigation and officially release the results of that investigation once it’s concluded.




QUESTION: Robert, can I ask a follow-up on this?




MR PALLADINO: Yes.




QUESTION: Thank you. After John Bolton and Jared Kushner spoke to MBS, why did the Secretary feel it was necessary to follow on with his own phone call? I mean, Jared has a close relationship with the crown prince, so what was conveyed in that phone call that hadn’t been conveyed in the previous one? And was there any sense of a timeline or a threat put forward that if this investigation isn’t concluded by a certain time then there will be action taken, or a sense of urgency or sort of deeper concern expressed if this investigation goes on, drags on?




MR PALLADINO: I’m not going to be able to provide anything beyond the readouts that the White House provided on the underlying content. Those are private diplomatic conversations. I would say that the United States Government wants to understand what’s going on and to express the importance of receiving a full accounting, and understanding in a very transparent and conclusive way what has transpired, that we’d like to get to the bottom of this, and we will continue to call for that.




QUESTION: Robert, can I ask a follow-up question?




MR PALLADINO: Yes, Carol.




QUESTION: There have been reports that the Turks have either an audio or a video purportedly showing the exact moment of his killing. Have they shared those, any sort of audio or video with the United States?




And if you could also address – this morning there was a statement condemning Venezuela in the death of a council member who apparently fell, pushed, or was – somehow fell from a building, and it was a very strong condemnation. Do you have some sort of metric that you use? Why not use similarly strong language in publicly demanding that the Saudis prove that he left the consulate?




MR PALLADINO: State Department senior officials and diplomats have spoken with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Government of Turkey through diplomatic channels about this matter. And from the Secretary of State on down, we have been engaged. I am not going to be able to go any further into the underlying content of those private conversations.




As to the case you raise in Venezuela, that – I saw that statement that the White House issued this morning. I mean, that’s a very – the facts on that case are such that the Venezuelan Government seized him upon his return from the United Nations General Assembly. Let me take a look at the actual content of that first.




That’s right. So Venezuelan authorities took Alban into custody, and that was from – upon his return from the United Nations General Assembly, where he was speaking about the importance of returning democracy to the people of Venezuela. And then, as you point out, he was pushed from a balcony or something happened. And so we, the United States – there is calling for increased pressure and we’d like to know – we would like more information. And I would also say that we extend our condolences and our sympathies to the family of Mr. Alban. That alarming detention does call for a thoroughly independent investigation free of the regime’s interference. And that tragedy highlights a continuing pattern of human rights abuses in that country, repression, and excessive use of force.




QUESTION: How is the --




MR PALLADINO: In the case of what we’re talking about in Turkey, we’re calling for a full and transparent investigation to understand what’s transpired. We are – we are trying to get to the bottom of it and we’re looking for answers.




QUESTION: Can I go on --




MR PALLADINO: Yes, please.




QUESTION: Thanks, Robert. Sorry if you already went into this. I was a minute or two late. But isn’t this kind of the second round of inquiries that the U.S. has made to the Saudis? Didn’t last week Deputy Secretary Sullivan and Secretary Pompeo raise this with the Saudi ambassador? And I’m just curious – if so, is this kind of follow-up because of more things that you’re hearing from the Turks in terms of their investigation, or is it because you haven’t gotten answers to your initial inquiries?




MR PALLADINO: We are – we – the President, the Vice President, and the Secretary of State have all spoken publicly on this now and expressed our concern. This is a journalist we’re talking about, one that is known to many of us. And so we want – we want to see a transparent investigation and we would like to see official results of that investigation, and we’re calling for cooperation in that matter.




QUESTION: How closely – I’m sorry – again, sorry if you addressed this, but how closely are you working with the Turks? And obviously they’re investigating; are they sharing the results of their investigation with you?




MR PALLADINO: I’m not going to – we are working – from the Secretary on down, we are very engaged on this issue. Senior officials, diplomats are speaking to both the kingdom of Saudi Arabia as well as the Government of Turkey, and we’re using diplomatic channels. We’re going to continue to do so. The Vice President earlier today made comments that the United States stands ready to assist in any way, and I’ll stop with that.




QUESTION: When he says – just one more, please. When he says that the U.S. stands ready to assist, obviously because Mr. Khashoggi is not a U.S. citizen or, I think at this point, even a legal permanent resident, there’s no jurisdiction. But have you expressed to the Saudis that you would appreciate an invitation to assist in the investigation or are you just kind of standing by and waiting for them to act?




MR PALLADINO: I’m not going to go and characterize the underlying nature of our diplomatic conversations at this time.




QUESTION: Well, no, but it’s a question about whether the U.S. is interested, and I know that you have to legally, according to international law, you would have to get an official invitation from the Turks. Is it your desire to join the investigation, or it’s really just you’re here to assist if they need it?




MR PALLADINO: I mean, that really is more of a question for the Vice President’s office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, not from the State Department.




QUESTION: Can you – all right. Because Heather mentioned the FBI yesterday very briefly and I just want to – have the Turks made a request for FBI assistance?




MR PALLADINO: I’m not going to be able to go into the details on private conversations.




QUESTION: And then in terms of your high-level diplomatic talks, other than the calls you – other than the calls that you’ve read out here, presumably you have people on the ground in both Ankara, Istanbul – in Ankara, Istanbul, and Riyadh all pushing this, right?




MR PALLADINO: Our embassies overseas, absolutely.




QUESTION: Okay.




MR PALLADINO: Our diplomatic mission overseas.




QUESTION: Who again – what’s the name of the ambassador in Turkey right now?




MR PALLADINO: I don’t have that in front of me right now and I – Matt --




QUESTION: What’s the name of the ambassador in Saudi Arabia right now?




MR PALLADINO: I see what you’re getting at. Okay. We are confident in our diplomatic --




QUESTION: The answer is that you don’t have an ambassador in either place, right?




MR PALLADINO: We --




QUESTION: And in fact, the charge in Riyadh has now been nominated to be the ambassador to Yemen. So just is it correct that you do not have ambassadors in place in either Ankara or Riyadh?




MR PALLADINO: But we have diplomatic staff, senior diplomatic officials --




QUESTION: I’m sure you do.




MR PALLADINO: -- very much – very much in charge. And yesterday Heather spoke at the top as well about the need for the State Department to get its full team on the field, and we definitely would reiterate our request for our colleagues in the Senate and their assistance in fielding our full camp.




QUESTION: Understood. Who has been nominated to be the new ambassador to Turkey, and who has been nominated to be the new ambassador to Saudi Arabia? Who are the nominees who are awaiting Senate movement?




MR PALLADINO: Matt, I don’t have that in front of me right now. And – but let me just say these are senior Foreign Service officers that have had full careers and we’re confident in our team’s ability.




QUESTION: You’re sure someone’s been nominated for both positions?




MR PALLADINO: I would have to take the question, Matt.




QUESTION: Robert. Robert, really quickly, just --




MR PALLADINO: All right, one more. Let’s go to Fox.




QUESTION: Significant reporting out there that Turkish officials believe that this is the responsibility of the Saudi Government, and the UK foreign secretary yesterday said if these reports are true, it would change the relationship with Saudi Arabia. Does the U.S. share that view with the UK Government?




MR PALLADINO: I’ll restate that – first of all, we’re not going to engage in hypothetical questions. What the United States is calling for – we don’t want to prejudge anything here, frankly. We want the official investigation to take place and we want to see the results of that investigation. So we are going to wait until the facts come out, and reiterate our call. We would like a thorough and a transparent investigation.




Guys, I don’t have too much more on this subject, but let’s go to AFP.




QUESTION: When you ask for an investigation and transparency on the result of these investigations, do you have the feeling that the response is positive from Saudi and the Turks, or is it too early to have that answer? Do you not know yet if they will do so?




MR PALLADINO: I’m not going to characterize private diplomatic conversations that we’re having right now.




Let’s go to Said, sure.




QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you for doing this. Good to see you behind the podium. I want to go the Palestinian issue very quickly. Today marked – today is the last day for the PLO office. They close at 4 o’clock this afternoon. Would you like to see them – to see this office reopened? Are you doing anything to have the office reopened? I mean, according to your letter, they have to shut down by today, October 10th.




MR PALLADINO: Correct.




QUESTION: That letter was sent out on September 10th.




MR PALLADINO: Yes.




QUESTION: Now, they shut down at 4 o’clock this afternoon.




MR PALLADINO: Right.




QUESTION: Would you like to see the office reopen and relations resumed?




MR PALLADINO: I’m not going to be able to answer that from the podium. I would take that question.




QUESTION: And one last question on the Palestinian issue. Yesterday I asked Heather about the young American student, Lara Alqasem. Have you spoken to the Israelis since then? She seems to be – apparently she’s free to come back, but she doesn’t want to do that. She wants to enter the country and resume her studies. Have you spoken to her, or have you spoken to the Israelis? And can you give us an update on this?




MR PALLADINO: I have no updates on dialogue between the United States and Israel since Heather’s briefing yesterday. But I can reiterate what was said from the podium yesterday, that out of respect for Ms. Alqasem’s privacy, there frankly – there’s not much we’re able to say. But we can say that we’re very much aware of her case and that our embassy is providing consular assistance to her.




QUESTION: Just one quick --




QUESTION: Like, when you say – what does that mean, exactly? Have they visited her? Have they set her up with a lawyer or whatever? And when you say “the embassy,” is it actually the embassy? Because remember, you moved the embassy to Jerusalem, you still have a big building in Tel Aviv, but Tel Aviv is immeasurably closer to the airport than – or to wherever she’s being held than Jerusalem is. So is it --




MR PALLADINO: It is the embassy.




QUESTION: So it is the embassy.




MR PALLADINO: It is the embassy.




QUESTION: It’s the consular people from Jerusalem or the --




MR PALLADINO: It’s the embassy.




QUESTION: From Jerusalem?




MR PALLADINO: Correct.




QUESTION: Okay. And have they seen her?




MR PALLADINO: Out of respect for Ms. Alqasem’s privacy, we’re not able to talk about particulars of her case, but we are providing consular assistance to her.




QUESTION: What does that mean?




MR PALLADINO: Consular assistance – I’ve seen media reports with statements from her attorney on this matter, and so that also goes to your question on whether or not she’s represented by counsel.




QUESTION: Are you concerned about her detention?




MR PALLADINO: As a general principle, we value freedom of expression, even in cases where we don’t agree with the political views expressed, and this is such a case. Our strong opposition to boycotts and sanctions of the state of Israel is well known and, as Heather said yesterday, Israel is a sovereign nation that can determine who enters.




QUESTION: Robert, sorry, that doesn’t answer the question if you’re concerned about her situation.




MR PALLADINO: I have nothing further on this at this point.




Yeah, please. Hi.




QUESTION: I’m sorry to go backward. Just one point of clarification: Can you say whether or not the Secretary also spoke with the crown prince yesterday, or was that today? You said it was a follow-up call.




MR PALLADINO: That --




QUESTION: And also was the conversation between Kushner and Bolton a joint conversation with the crown prince?




MR PALLADINO: I don’t have the full details on the White House call other than what I provided. I’d have to refer you to the White House for clarification there. As far as at what time that call took place, I don’t have that detail and I wouldn’t want to misspeak, but I can say that it took place after the ambassador and the national security advisor and Mr. Kushner’s call.




QUESTION: And just one follow-up, if I may.




MR PALLADINO: Yeah.




QUESTION: My colleague had asked this and I wasn’t sure if you had answered: Has the U.S. seen any of the audio or video that the Turkish Government claims to have regarding the killing of --




MR PALLADINO: We are waiting for the results of the official investigation, and that’s what we have at this point.




QUESTION: Robert --




MR PALLADINO: We would like to see a full and transparent and forthright resolution of this.




Yeah.




QUESTION: Just one quick one, Rob. I notice that Zal Khalilzad, the envoy for Afghanistan, is going to be making a trip to Saudi this week, or maybe even today, I’m not sure, but – I know this isn’t necessarily in his official lane, but will he be meeting with any Saudi officials on this particular instance or will he be raising it in his meetings on --




MR PALLADINO: The purpose of Ambassador Khalilzad --




QUESTION: I know what the purpose is.




MR PALLADINO: You know what the purpose is.




QUESTION: I know what the purpose is, but --




MR PALLADINO: And that’s the purpose for his meetings as well, okay? So that’s – it would be limited to his mandate.




QUESTION: So that means no?




MR PALLADINO: It means no. Okay, thank you. Yes, please.




QUESTION: Thank you, quick questions. Do you know why the Ambassador Nikki Haley resigned? Do you have any idea why she --




QUESTION: Yes. (Laughter.)




MR PALLADINO: She spoke about this yesterday from the White House. I am – I would refer you to Ambassador Haley’s remarks, and I – yeah.




QUESTION: I know, but what is the reason why she resigned so quickly, though?




MR PALLADINO: I would have to refer you to the U.S. mission at the United Nations.




QUESTION: Does she have a new job somewhere?




MR PALLADINO: Of course she has a very good job, all right?




QUESTION: Oh.




MR PALLADINO: And – no, we wish her well. We’ve – the Secretary since his arrival has worked closely with Ambassador Haley, and Heather spoke a little bit about that yesterday. We were – we will miss her and we will – we work very closely with her staff, I would say.




QUESTION: Yeah.




MR PALLADINO: Yeah.




QUESTION: North Korea?




MR PALLADINO: Sure.




QUESTION: On climate change?




QUESTION: North Korea.




MR PALLADINO: Let’s go to North Korea, okay?




QUESTION: Yeah. (Laughter.)




QUESTION: Yeah.




QUESTION: So --




QUESTION: You guys are so quick to follow up.




MR PALLADINO: Sure, North Korea.




QUESTION: All right.




MR PALLADINO: I’ve heard of this --




QUESTION: It’s a much easier subject.




MR PALLADINO: Okay. (Laughter.)




QUESTION: So Heather talked a little bit about Secretary Pompeo. He met with the North Koreans to plan the next summit and there was also talk of working-level talks with Steve Biegun. Do we have any idea of a timeline for when Steve Biegun is going to meet for more working-level talks with him?




MR PALLADINO: No trip announcements to make at this time, but that’s something that we’re looking at right now, yeah.




QUESTION: Do we have any, like, soon, farther?




MR PALLADINO: Hopefully soon. Hopefully soon. We’d like to – yeah, we’d like to continue progress moving forward. Any more on North Korea?




QUESTION: Yeah.




MR PALLADINO: Okay. Let’s go --




QUESTION: Soon? Soon means – soon means how soon? Before the election or after the election? That’s what we want to know, timeline.




MR PALLADINO: Yeah. We have no trip announcements at this time to make, really, and so we’ll keep working at that.




QUESTION: For Washington or Pyongyang?




MR PALLADINO: For the special representative, Steve Biegun are we talking now? We --




QUESTION: I mean --




MR PALLADINO: Yesterday the President spoke about this subject and he said --




QUESTION: Mar-a-Lago?




MR PALLADINO: He said specifically that after – after the midterm elections, so we’ll continue working towards that. Part of the most recent trip to was basically to come up with working level teams for both sides that could continue to work together and push this forward. That’s what Special Representative Biegun is leading, and part of that focus definitely will be on a second summit between the two leaders.




QUESTION: All right, thank you.




QUESTION: North Korea?




MR PALLADINO: All right. North Korea, please.




QUESTION: Thank you. Yesterday, Russian foreign ministry said that they actually proposed five-way talks, including Russia and China, United States, South Korea, and North Korea. Is that a formula you would support to ease the tension in North Korea?




MR PALLADINO: Well, we noted the statement out of Moscow, and I would just say that we look forward to working with Russia, China, and North Korea to achieve, as quickly as possible, the final, fully verified denuclearization of North Korea. The most recent trip to Pyongyang, we really – there was forward progress and we’d like to continue to see that move forward. We welcome the steps that North Korea’s taken, and I would just add that the – President Trump has been very clear from the beginning that sanctions relief will follow denuclearization. And sooner we get to that point, the sooner the United States will think about lifting sanctions.




QUESTION: So you are rejecting their proposal? They called for adjusted UN sanctions ahead of denuclearization, so I guess you are saying no?




MR PALLADINO: Well, I mean, Secretary Pompeo’s spoken about this before. The Russian and Chinese – for example, up at – during the general assembly, had some ideas about how we might begin to think about reducing sanctions. But in general, got to point out that they were all supportive of maintaining the United Nations Security Council resolutions and sanctions that underlay them.




The United States position continues that – it’s the pressure campaign and the underlying sanctions that the world came together to impose that has gotten us to this point and will continue to be the foundation for what we earnestly hope is a brighter future for North Korea. And we are going to – the Singapore summit was such a strong first start. We’re making progress and we look forward to taking further steps in that regard.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: Two quick ones that we didn’t get to before. Have the Saudis been helpful or unhelpful thus far in the investigation, given the difficulty that the Turks have had getting in there and searching?




MR PALLADINO: I’m not going to characterize private diplomatic conversations other than to reiterate what the – than what we’ve said. We continue to call for a transparent and conclusive investigation. We’d like to see how the results of this --




QUESTION: But have they given – there have been so many conversations at this point. Have the Saudis given you any indication that they will conduct a transparent investigation and be forthcoming?




MR PALLADINO: We’re having – we continue to speak with both Saudi Arabia and Turkey at the highest levels, and we’re going to continue to call for that. All right, let’s go over here, and we’re --




QUESTION: Thank you.




QUESTION: State Department characterizes that we are – U.S. is with lockstep with South Korea and Japan. But the South Korean foreign minister confirmed that Pompeo was discontent and complained about the inter-Korean military pact in his last inter-Korean summit. What is your reaction to that? Was he discontent and complained about it, or does that mean South Korea’s going ahead of --




MR PALLADINO: We talk to the South Koreans I would say almost every day, and we are closely coordinated – coordinating with our Republic of Korea ally. I – we’re able to speak about a lot of things together and that’s because we really share the same objective here. And I haven’t seen that report, but all I would say is please, we are – we’re really working closely with the Republic of Korea.




QUESTION: No, but I mean, it doesn’t really answer the question of – as to whether the U.S. feels that the South Koreans are not necessarily in lockstep, that there is a perception, isn’t there, on the administration that the South Koreans are leaning too forward with the North Koreans right now as you’re moving in this process?




MR PALLADINO: We’re really closely coordinating with them. We are – we’re quite --




QUESTION: That doesn’t mean you agree on everything.




MR PALLADINO: We’re – many times across the spectrum, our closest friends, we’re able to work through these things because we’re able to speak frankly with one another. I would say that the conversations that are going on not only with Japan and South Korea, these are closely coordinated regularly at all levels of our government. They’re happening constantly.




All right. Last question. I thank --




QUESTION: Can I have a (inaudible).




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: Wait a second. How are you going to – are you going to answer the --




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: We got Conor – all right, we’re going to – Conor.




QUESTION: -- answer Conor’s climate change question?




QUESTION: Thank you, Matt.




MR PALLADINO: Conor, climate change.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: Apparently this is the only building in town --




MR PALLADINO: Conor.




QUESTION: -- where climate change will be raised. (Laughter.)




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: Conor, what is – what is – tell me about this question, Conor.




QUESTION: Thank you. I was interrupted.




QUESTION: On the IPCC’s report that was released on Monday --




MR PALLADINO: Yes.




QUESTION: -- obviously a very dire warning that there needs to be urgent action before there is irreversible changes to the climate. Do you, does the United States Government agree with that finding, and if so, what are you doing about it?




MR PALLADINO: I would say that we appreciate the hard work that the scientists and experts, many of whom were Americans, put into developing that report. And I would also say – point out – point out what it is for what it is: the Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change under their own procedures, that – that report that they produced and its contents – that remains the responsibility of its authors. Governments do not formally endorse specific findings presented by the authors.




But as to your underlying question, as we noted in the statement – the United States Government’s statement about that, there are inherent limitations of trying to assess projected impacts and costs of warming at a specific temperature and time period.




QUESTION: It’s what? You know that there’s a hurricane that is smashing into the Florida panhandle right now that a lot of people say were – was exacerbated by climate change? The ice is – Arctic ice is melting, Antarctic ice is melting at record paces and you’re not sure?




MR PALLADINO: There are --




QUESTION: If this was two years ago, I think we would have had a vastly different answer. How is this not denial of climate change if you can’t accept the report that – like this?




MR PALLADINO: Our policy --




QUESTION: Do you think it’s not true?




MR PALLADINO: We are leading the world in affordable, abundant and secure energy, while at the same time we protect the environment and are reducing emissions through job-creating innovations. This is the U.S. policy. And we’re doing good on this regard. Carbon emissions have fallen. From 2005 to 2017, they declined by 14 percent, while global energy-related carbon emissions rose during that time. And this has been possible because of American innovation and through the development and large-scale deployment of new, affordable and cleaner technologies to capitalize on America’s --




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MR PALLADINO: -- energy abundance. Yes.




QUESTION: It’s also been possible because of the previous administration’s policies, many of which are now being rolled back by this administration: the Clean Power Plant, limitations on methane, waste, things that you are now actively redoing and getting rid of. Doesn’t that then hurt those same standards that you’re now praising?




MR PALLADINO: We are a leader, the United States is a leader in energy technology and innovation, and because of that we have seen drastic reductions in carbon emissions so they’re now at their lowest level since – they’ve been since 1992. Our policy is such that we are unleashing the capabilities through this innovation and we believe that that’s the way that the United States can help contribute to this problem.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: Part of the report is that even if the policies of this administration are undertaking don’t exacerbate the problem or don’t take away from the progress that has already been made, that whatever is being done isn’t enough and that there has to be radical change now, or in 20 to 40 years, it’s too late. So do you – does the administration accept or not accept that?




MR PALLADINO: The United States is at the forefront of reducing its carbon emissions and we’re doing – been able to do that thanks to these new, affordable, cleaner technologies that are capitalizing on our energy abundance. That’s – and that’s the direction that we’re moving in.




QUESTION: Venezuela?




QUESTION: I want to go Venezuela. Senator --




MR PALLADINO: The last one, let’s – we’ll stop at Venezuela, please.




QUESTION: Senator Corker went to Caracas to talk to Maduro. Was that trip taken – was – did it come with the blessing of the Secretary? And Corker’s also said he’s going to talk to the Secretary about that trip. Has he spoken to him?




MR PALLADINO: I don’t have any information on that. I would have to take that question and get back to you, Lesley, and I’m sorry.




QUESTION: Okay.




MR PALLADINO: Guys, thank you for my first day. (Applause.) There shall be more.




(The briefing was concluded at 2:19 p.m.)









The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

View more on U.S. Department of State's website »
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on October 10, 2018 14:49

October 9, 2018

Department Press Briefings : Department Press Briefing - October 9, 2018

Heather Nauert





Spokesperson


Department Press Briefing





Washington, DC





October 9, 2018











Index for Today's Briefing

INDONESIA



DEPARTMENT



SAUDI ARABIA



SAUDI ARABIA/TURKEY



MIDDLE EAST PEACE



ISRAEL



IRAQ



NORTH KOREA



CHINA



UNITED NATIONS



CHINA



AFGHANISTAN


TRANSCRIPT:













3:12 p.m. EDT




MS NAUERT: Hi, everyone. Good afternoon. Nice to see you all. Okay, a couple announcements to start before we’re able to take a few questions today.




First, I’d like to address the earthquake and tsunami in Central Sulawesi in Indonesia, and I’d like to say that the United States is coordinating closely with the Government of Indonesia to respond to the earthquake and tsunami that struck there. Since I spoke to you last week, the United States, through USAID, is now providing a total of $3.7 million in assistance through our partners to deliver essential relief items, including shelter kits, blankets, hygiene kits, solar-powered lamps, and other lifesaving aid. USAID is also airlifting heavy-duty plastic sheeting to Indonesia to provide for emergency shelter needs of up to 110,500 people. USAID has deployed a team of disaster experts to coordinate our humanitarian response efforts and is supporting a U.S. Forest Service emergency operations expert who’s on the ground providing technical support to the Government of Indonesia’s disaster response.




The Department of Defense has provided three C-130s and has already transported nearly 30 – 63 metric tons of disaster relief supplies into the affected areas. The U.S. Government has also provided advanced technologies to help the Government of Indonesia map the disaster area.




In addition, American companies have also mobilized to respond with financial donations, heavy equipment, transportation, and other humanitarian supplies. The U.S. citizens we were aware of in the affected areas have been evacuated. We have no reports of U.S. citizens who have been injured or killed by the earthquake or the tsunami, and we urge any additional U.S. citizens in the affected areas to contact their loved ones directly and update them on their social media status. If you’re in the affected area and need emergency services, please contact the local authorities.




Next, I want to address something that the Secretary raised last week because nothing has changed. There are still 65 State Department nominees sitting in the United States Senate. That’s over a quarter of all the senior-level confirmable positions that the United States Department of State is tasked with using to achieve its diplomatic outcomes. There is bipartisan agreement that a fully staffed State Department is critical to American national security. The State Department has been criticized for having gaps in leadership positions, but now we’ve done our part to fix that; now the Senate needs to do its part.




As the Secretary has said, these candidates are quality candidates. They’re not sitting on the Senate floor because of objections with respect to their quality, their professionalism, or their excellence and ability to deliver American foreign policy. The Secretary had addressed this last week, and he said we have members of the Senate for whom partisanship has now driven delay and obstruction of getting America’s diplomatic corps into every corner of the world. What Senator Menendez and other members of the Senate are doing to hold back American diplomacy rests squarely on their shoulders.




And with that I’d be happy to take your questions. Anne, you want to go ahead?




QUESTION: I wanted to ask about Jamal Khashoggi.




MS NAUERT: Mm-hmm.




QUESTION: Have you received any response from Saudi Arabia since Secretary Pompeo registered concerns regarding his disappearance?




MS NAUERT: Sure. Let’s start out – first, I’d like to say I imagine that most if not all of you saw the statement that we put out last night. You probably also heard the President’s comments about it yesterday and also the Vice President’s tweet that he put out yesterday.




From the Secretary on down, we have been engaged in this matter. This is something that we’ve been following. I understand that the President intends to speak with the Saudis, so I’m not going to get ahead of that conversation that the President may be having.




In the Secretary’s statement, he said that we’ve seen conflicting reports about his status. We’re not going to make any judgments about what had happened to him. The United States is certainly concerned about his whereabouts. Senior officials at the State Department have spoken with Saudi officials through diplomatic channels about the matter. We call on the Government of Saudi Arabia to conduct a thorough and transparent investigation.




QUESTION: It was nearly a week between his – first reports of his disappearance and that statement from Secretary Pompeo. Why was there such a delay between those two events?




MS NAUERT: So are you assuming that taking time to put out a statement means that the State Department has not been doing anything? Is that your assumption?




QUESTION: What was the State Department doing before the statement came out?




MS NAUERT: The State Department was engaged at the highest levels and also at the working level and having conversations with Saudi Government officials, and I’ll leave it at that.




QUESTION: And then so what was the reason behind that delay in the statement coming out?




MS NAUERT: I wouldn’t – I wouldn’t call it a delay. The United States Government, as we handle situations in other countries as well, sometimes we decide to conduct our conversations and to conduct our diplomacy more privately than publicly because we feel that that could have the best outcome, and I’ll leave it at that.




Okay. Hi, Lesley. Go ahead.




QUESTION: Hi. Welcome back.




MS NAUERT: Thank you.




QUESTION: You must be exhausted, having just arrived.




MS NAUERT: Kylie is here, I’m here, so we’re doing okay for so far.




QUESTION: Just arrived last night. Yes.




MS NAUERT: Yes.




QUESTION: Has the U.S. seen any evidence that Jamal might be alive?




MS NAUERT: We don’t know what has happened to him. We don’t have any information on that. That’s why I want to say we don’t want to make any judgments about what happened, and we call for a thorough and transparent investigation.




QUESTION: You’ve called for a thorough and transparent inspection from the – investigation from the Saudis, but what about the Turks? Have you asked them for their evidence, if they’ve seen --




MS NAUERT: I don’t have any information on that. I think that would be in the FBI’s lane and local investigators’ lane.




QUESTION: But you said you – they – that on these diplomatic channels you’ve spoken to the Saudis, but what about the Turks?




MS NAUERT: I don’t have any information on that. I would imagine that through the course of our conversations with the Turkish Government – we have many conversations with the Turkish Government – that this has certainly come up.




QUESTION: But that would be – that would be P, yes?




QUESTION: Did the Secretary --




MS NAUERT: Just hold on. Hold on.




QUESTION: On Friday, I saw on the Public Schedule that Mr. Hale had a meeting with the Turkish ambassador here at the State Department.




MS NAUERT: I was out on Friday, so I don’t recall what was on his private – on his public schedule. I’d have to just double-check on that, okay?




QUESTION: Okay. So --




MS NAUERT: I’m not saying it didn’t happen. I’m just not aware of it if it did. I was out on Friday.




Go ahead.




QUESTION: Since this happened on Turkish soil, wouldn’t speaking to the Turks and being part of their investigation be absolutely key to --




MS NAUERT: I did not say that we have not spoken with the Turkish Government. I just don’t have any information on it at this moment. Okay? If I have anything in addition for you, I’ll let you know.




Hey, Carol.




QUESTION: Hi. Can I ask a follow-up on Jamal Khashoggi?




MS NAUERT: Sure.




QUESTION: So the UK foreign secretary has said that if the reports are correct, “We will treat the incident seriously.” I wanted to ask why can’t – or why has not Secretary Pompeo said that if the reports are true and the Saudis, our allies, turn out to be cold-blooded killers, that there will be repercussions?




MS NAUERT: I think that would be entirely a hypothetical question, and so if the Brits decide to comment that way, they’re more than welcome to do so. But we’re going to wait until the facts come out, and we call again for a thorough and transparent investigation.




QUESTION: Will there be repercussions?




MS NAUERT: Carol, I’m not going to get ahead or assume that anything happened. We’re calling for a thorough and transparent investigation. And again, let me say this one more time: I’ll leave it at that. I don’t have anything more for you on this today.




QUESTION: Can you just confirm if it was Pompeo?




QUESTION: Does the Secretary plan to speak himself with his counterpart in Saudi Arabia, and did he raise this question when he spoke with the crown prince last week?




MS NAUERT: I can confirm --




QUESTION: There was a readout --




MS NAUERT: I can confirm that the Secretary has had phone conversations, but I don’t have any of the details. And some of those would just be private diplomatic conversations, which I will not be able to read out. Last time I’ll say this: I don’t have anything more for you on this today. If and when I have more, I will bring it to you. Okay?




Go right ahead.




QUESTION: On the Palestinians.




MS NAUERT: Yes.




QUESTION: Two quick --




QUESTION: Is it okay? Can I have one more follow-up on Khashoggi, please?




MS NAUERT: Sir, I don’t have anything --




QUESTION: It’s in relation to what you just said.




MS NAUERT: I don’t have anything more for you on that.




QUESTION: Let me just --




MS NAUERT: When I do, I would be happy to give it to you.




QUESTION: Let me just ask my question, and you decide if you don’t want --




MS NAUERT: Okay, I’ve not met you before, but go right ahead. Welcome to the State Department. And tell me your publication.




QUESTION: Fadi Mansour with Al Jazeera. I’ve been covering this place for 10 years now, thank you very much.




MS NAUERT: Pardon me?




QUESTION: I’ve been covering this place for 10 years. I don’t come every day because I cover other places.




MS NAUERT: Okay. Well, it’s nice to meet you. You’re welcome anytime.




QUESTION: Yes. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to ask questions. So --




MS NAUERT: Go right ahead. And this will be the last question on this. Go ahead.




QUESTION: Thank you. So the fact that you called on the Saudis to carry an investigation, is the State Department assuming that Saudi Arabia is responsible for the whereabout of Khashoggi?




MS NAUERT: We’re not assuming anything. Only because it was their consulate, we’re asking them to conduct an investigation.




QUESTION: Thank you.




MS NAUERT: Said, go right ahead.




QUESTION: Yes, very quickly, U.S. envoy Mr. Greenblatt said that the Trump plan, the deal of the century, is heavily focused on Israeli security. Does that mean that you guys are giving up on the two-state solution, or you see the – you don’t see any, like, contradictions between focusing on Israeli --




MS NAUERT: This is something that we have talked about for a very, very long time. We support that if both parties --




QUESTION: And this was --




MS NAUERT: -- if both parties can agree to it.




QUESTION: Right.




MS NAUERT: That hasn’t changed.




QUESTION: But this was only yesterday. I mean, he went out of his way to say that it is focused on Israeli security. What does that mean to you?




MS NAUERT: I’m not going to parse his words. I’d just refer you back to his comments. But our position has not changed. As the President has laid out, as he did not too long ago at the UN General Assembly, that we support a two-state solution if both sides can agree to that.




QUESTION: And one quick question on a young American student who has been detained in Israel for the past five days because she supports BDS. Are you – can you share with us if you’ve done anything? Has she contacted the American embassy, or are you in touch with her? Do you know her whereabouts?




MS NAUERT: We are aware of her case. Our embassy is providing consular access, as we would to all American citizens. We value freedom of expression. You and I have talked about this many times.




QUESTION: Right. Many times.




MS NAUERT: Also in cases where people don’t agree with local policies or even the United States policies. Ultimately, it is up to the Government of Israel to decide who it wants to let into the country. I don’t have anything more for you on that.




QUESTION: But she – this young woman, Lara Alqasem, she has a visa. She was accepted at the Hebrew University. She was going there to study and so on. She – all of the stuff that she should have done was already done. Are you not concerned about that?




MS NAUERT: Said, it’s ultimately up to the Government of Israel, or any country for that matter, to decide which individuals, which Americans, it wants to let in. Okay?




Hi.




QUESTION: Heather, the issue is not that she wasn’t allowed in. It’s that she’s being detained.




MS NAUERT: Excuse me. Or being detained. I don’t have any information beyond that. Okay?




Laurie, go right ahead.




QUESTION: Hi. Nadia Murad, the Yezidi woman who was captured by ISIS and help captive, just won the Nobel Peace Prize, as probably everyone knows, and she spoke yesterday. And she did note one positive point, the start of de-mining in Yezidi areas, which I assume is related to Secretary Pompeo’s announcement in July at the Religious Freedom conference of extra money for de-mining in the northern Iraq religious minority areas. So they’re very happy with that, but overall it was a grim picture, and among her complaints was no justice for Yezidis. And you and others, including the UN, have recognized ISIS’s assault on the Yezidis as genocide, but the Iraqi Government hasn’t. Are you prepared to put any pressure on them to do so?




MS NAUERT: I’m not familiar with her remarks. Of course, I’m familiar with who she is. She was one of the guests at our religious freedom ministerial that was held over the summer, and we were so proud to have hosted her here. My understanding is that the Vice President is meeting with her – I believe it’s today. The Secretary and I had a brief exchange about her becoming one of the co-winners of the Nobel Peace Prize, and we’re really proud of her. She’s a very heroic woman, who’s done so much to advance the cause of not just religious freedom but also freedom for women, especially freedom from sexual crimes.




I don’t have her comments. I don’t have those remarks, so I’m just not going to comment on it beyond that.




QUESTION: How about her call for an international criminal trial for those members of ISIS who have committed these crimes against Yezidis?




MS NAUERT: I’m afraid I just don’t have anything for you on that today. Okay?




QUESTION: South Asia?




MS NAUERT: Okay, hi.




QUESTION: Heather?




MS NAUERT: How are you?




QUESTION: Thank you. Welcome from (inaudible).




MS NAUERT: Thank you.




QUESTION: Okay, on North Korea, this trip – has Kim Jong-un submitted a list of nuclear facilities, or you got anything from him for evidence of nuclear list?




MS NAUERT: We sure did. We made a lot of progress. As you know, we just got back last night from three – four countries in I think it was three days. So it was a very busy time. The Secretary and Chairman Kim discussed the four pillars of the Singapore summit. That was something that was important for them to do. They spent considerable time together. The Secretary and the President, of course, have referenced that since – the Secretary just over at the White House, speaking about this.




Among the things they also discussed was an upcoming second summit that would be attended by our President and also Chairman Kim, and we look forward to working on all of the details of that. They also agreed to instruct their respective working level groups, led by Steve Biegun, our special representative, and also his counterpart who was named in North Korea, to start intensifying discussions on some of those four pillars that were laid out in the Singapore summit.




As you know, Chairman Kim had invited inspectors to visit the Punggye-ri nuclear test site to confirm that it’s been irreversibly dismantled. We were pleased with that. And President Trump looks forward to continuing to build upon the trust that was first established at the Singapore summit.




So we view it as making a lot of progress. We’re pleased with that.




QUESTION: But North Korea has already destroyed Punggye-ri nuclear site and Tongchang-ri missile site. They --




MS NAUERT: I think we can say this: We can affirmatively say that they invited a group of journalists out to watch something take place. Inspectors have not been there yet. So inviting inspectors to join, to take a look, and do their work is entirely different from what we’ve seen already.




QUESTION: Is that happen for denuclearizations?




MS NAUERT: I’m sorry?




QUESTION: Is this have for the denuclearizations, for what you – U.S. exactly needed to, but -




MS NAUERT: That would be a positive step forward, and Chairman Kim agreed to that, to have inspectors at that site.




QUESTION: Follow up on --




MS NAUERT: Okay. Go ahead. Let’s just – hold on, I’ll come back to you. Hi.




QUESTION: So you’ve made progress on a Trump-Kim summit. Do you have any idea of, like, the timing on that? Like, will it be before the end of the year or sometime afterwards?




MS NAUERT: Well, as the President has said – and I’m not going to get ahead of the President, of course, but the President has said he looks forward to seeing Chairman Kim soon. As you all remember, when we were planning for the Singapore summit, that takes time. There are a lot of details that are involved in pulling together a summit of that magnitude. We need to find a place that both countries can get to. We have to compare schedules – Chairman Kim’s schedule, the President’s schedule, the Secretary’s schedule, probably National Security Advisor Bolton’s schedule – a lot of schedules. We also have to identify a place that has the infrastructure that is needed to accommodate 5,000 journalists. I believe there are 5,000 that were accredited last time.




So there are a lot of things that come into play here, and so we are hard at work at that. I know Steve Biegun looks forward to having follow-on conversations with his counterpart about some of those details that go into the summit. And as soon as we have something for you, we’ll let you know. Okay.




QUESTION: So would you say that the – what you’re waiting for to announce even a time or a location for that, is it all just logistical, then?




MS NAUERT: Well, Michelle, as I just said, and I’ll repeat it again: A lot goes into this. We start with --




QUESTION: I heard that. Yeah. You don’t have to repeat it.




MS NAUERT: We start with comparing schedules.




QUESTION: You don’t have to repeat it.




MS NAUERT: Okay.




QUESTION: I’m trying to save you some time. So are you saying that it’s all logistical before you announce a date and time, or are you waiting for North Korea to do something?




MS NAUERT: We are looking forward to having our second summit. The President is looking forward to doing that. The timing of that will ultimately be announced by the White House. It’ll be a White House led meeting. And when we’re ready to announce that, we will.




QUESTION: But the question is --




MS NAUERT: Yeah.




QUESTION: -- since you listed all the logistics involved, are you simply waiting for logistics, or are you waiting for North Korea to do something related to denuclearization?




MS NAUERT: We have not said anything about waiting for North Korea to do anything more -




QUESTION: Okay.




MS NAUERT: -- in order to have that summit. Okay. Nick.




QUESTION: And when you say a lot of progress, since Punggye-ri is by many accounts an aging facility that’s already been destroyed, by allowing inspectors to come there and see this, which is not necessarily key to North Korea’s current and future nuclear program, why would you characterize that as a lot of progress?




MS NAUERT: Michelle, I think that’s a very good step. I’ll go back and say it one more time. What you have seen were a bunch of journalists brought out to that site and you saw some sort of an explosion. Sending in inspectors to take a look around is an entirely different step and a step in the right direction, and we think that that’s progress, along with the other things that were addressed in the meeting.




Nick, go ahead.




QUESTION: Just as a follow-up to that, I think one of the big questions is what exactly the administration, Secretary Pompeo, President Trump, actually want to achieve from this summit. What’s the main – the headline goal for --




MS NAUERT: I’m not going to get ahead of the President. The Secretary firmly believes – and I know that this is much to your dismay, to reporters’ dismay – that our negotiations are best handled in public, so I’m not going to get – negotiate it here with all of you from the podium, and I’ll let our experts do the negotiating and do their work and not get ahead of that.




QUESTION: Heather --




MS NAUERT: Hi.




QUESTION: Follow-on on that. The first summit was about general commitments, complete denuclearization by Chairman Kim. Do you expect from the next summit to achieve broader agreement with the ways and --




MS NAUERT: I’m not going to get ahead of what is being discussed at that summit, okay.




QUESTION: Not what is being discussed, but what you expect.




MS NAUERT: My job is not – my job is not to lay out what our policy will be.




QUESTION: Because we see your goal; we don’t see your method. So --




MS NAUERT: And – okay, so that’s a fair point. You see our goal, but you don’t see our method. That is something --




QUESTION: Do you want to do it – work in progress, step by step, or do you want to have a deal --




MS NAUERT: That is something that we will discuss --




QUESTION: -- with everything inside?




MS NAUERT: We will discuss that with the North Koreans and not the broader public, not the media, because we believe that negotiations – some of these complicated negotiations – are best handled between our country and theirs. And our objective is to get to the fully, final, verified denuclearization of North Korea. We are working hard toward that goal. We think we’ve made progress and we’ll continue working toward that goal.




QUESTION: Ambassador Haley --




MS NAUERT: Hi. Go ahead. Hi.




QUESTION: India.




QUESTION: Welcome back.




MS NAUERT: Thank you.




QUESTION: So Secretary Pompeo did not meet with the Chinese President Xi Jinping on Monday. Could you please shed some light on what happened? And what is – what was the reason given – provided by Chinese Government? Because it’s a understanding that arrangements were being made for this meeting to happen.




MS NAUERT: We never announced any specific meetings ahead of our trip to China. Is it not every time that the Secretary would go to any given country that he would be meeting with the president of that country. Sometimes he does; sometimes he doesn’t. And so that was just a reflection of this trip, but I know the Secretary had good, constructive meetings with his Chinese counterparts that he met with yesterday.




QUESTION: Ambassador Haley --




QUESTION: Has the U.S. asked to such meeting to happen? Has the United States asked China – ask Chinese Government to arrange a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping?




MS NAUERT: Not to my knowledge. Anything going forward, we’ll let you know when we have that planned.




QUESTION: Would you characterize U.S.-China relationship as a strategic competitor?




MS NAUERT: Well, look, they’re certainly a competitor. It’s a complex and broad-based relationship that we have with China, as you all saw in the comments and exchanges between the Secretary and his counterparts. We have areas of common interest. North Korea is one of them. Working to combat illegal narcotics is another area where we work well together. We also have areas of disagreement and areas where we have challenges, and we’ll keep working together on that. It’s obviously an important relationship that we need to work hard to maintain. Okay.




QUESTION: Ambassador Haley --




MS NAUERT: Yeah. Yes, go ahead.




QUESTION: Ambassador – very quickly. Was the Secretary surprised that Ambassador Haley resigned? Does he have any comment? Could you share with us what was his reaction?




MS NAUERT: Well, I think the Secretary addressed that from the White House today, in which he talked about what a great partner Ambassador Haley has been. The Secretary and Ambassador Haley have worked very well together since the beginning of this administration, but I would say more closely once he became Secretary of State. At the working level, from my level, her team and Ambassador Haley have been wonderful to work with. Sorry to see her depart. This happens, of course, in administrations. The Secretary, I think, is sorry to see her depart as well.




I’m not going to get into who knew what when and all of that. What is ultimately important is that the President knew about her decision well in advance. They had those conversations. I’m not privy to those conversations, so I’d have to refer you to the White House for that. We’re sorry to see her go and thank her for all her incredible service that she’s done on behalf of the U.S. Government and on taxpayers at the United Nations.




QUESTION: May I just follow up?




MS NAUERT: Okay. Okay.




QUESTION: A follow-up?




MS NAUERT: Last question. I’m going to have to go.




QUESTION: So we saw the exchange of rhetorics when Secretary Pompeo was in China. Would you say those tensions now between United States and China would spill over to your cooperation on North Korea at this very critical time?




MS NAUERT: We don’t think so, because China again and again has said to us, publicly and privately, that they are committed to the denuclearization of North Korea. They understand that; they recognize that. They recognize the importance of that matter. We don’t think they’re backing away. What we do say, though, is that countries including China and Russia can always do more. They can do more, but they are also one of the countries that had voted for UN Security Council resolutions, and so we expect those to uphold those.




I’ll do one last question. Nazira, hi.




QUESTION: Welcome back.




MS NAUERT: Were you at the White House earlier today?




QUESTION: Yes.




MS NAUERT: Did I see you?




QUESTION: Yeah.




MS NAUERT: I thought I saw your yellow over there.




QUESTION: Yeah.




MS NAUERT: She gets around.




QUESTION: Okay. Thank you.




MS NAUERT: Thank you.




QUESTION: Heather, I have two question, one question regarding Afghan delegation. Dr. Abdullah was here. What is their – do you think that they have any achievement? Do they meet any high officials, U.S. authority?




MS NAUERT: I’m afraid I don’t have any information if – as to whether or not Dr. Abdullah was here at the State Department or here in Washington. I can look --




QUESTION: He was in New York. I’m asking about General Assemblies at the – New York.




MS NAUERT: Oh, he was in – oh, at the General Assembly.




QUESTION: Did he have any meeting with the Secretary of State or either President Trump?




MS NAUERT: I don’t recall that. It seems like that was a year ago even though that was only two weeks ago, so I’m so sorry. My apologies.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MS NAUERT: I will have to check – double-check to see if he had any meetings with U.S. officials.




QUESTION: Two weeks ago.




MS NAUERT: Okay. I’ll check on that for you.




QUESTION: Yeah. The next question, Ambassador Khalilzad.




MS NAUERT: Yes.




QUESTION: He is in Afghanistan and he traveled to Pakistan. Do you think that useful for Afghanistan, Khalilzad mission?




MS NAUERT: I think it’s extremely helpful to have Ambassador Khalilzad out on travel. This is part of our team on the field, having our people do what they do best, and that is going out and conducting American diplomacy around the world. He is leading an interagency delegation to Afghanistan, to Pakistan, to the UAE, to Qatar, and also to Saudi Arabia. It’s a fairly lengthy trip. His mission there is to coordinate our U.S. efforts to bring the Taliban to the negotiating table. This is still Afghan-led, Afghan-owned. Our policy has not changed in any way. But we’re proud and pleased to have him out there advocating on this behalf and we’ll be working in close coordination with the Afghan Government.




I’ve got to go, guys. We’ll see you again real soon. Thanks.




(The briefing was concluded at 3:37 p.m.)









The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

View more on U.S. Department of State's website »
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on October 09, 2018 15:13

September 20, 2018

Department Press Briefings : Department Press Briefing - September 20, 2018

Heather Nauert





Spokesperson


Department Press Briefing





Washington, DC





September 20, 2018











Index for Today's Briefing

DEPARTMENT/GEORGIA



DEPARTMENT



UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY



NORTH KOREA/SOUTH KOREA



AFGHANISTAN



PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES



MIDDLE EASTPEACE



IRAQ/IRAN



PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES



DEPARTMENT



INDIA/PAKISTAN



NORTH KOREA



EGYPT


TRANSCRIPT:







3:22 p.m. EDT









MS NAUERT: Good afternoon, everyone. Hope you’re well today. I’d like to start off with telling you a little bit about who we welcomed here at the State Department today. Today Secretary Pompeo met with the Georgian prime minister and reaffirmed the strength of the U.S.-Georgia bilateral relationship. Ten years ago, Russia invaded Georgia and continues to occupy the Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. In spite of Russians’ occupation of 20 percent of its territory, and in spite of deaths, kidnappings, and other abuses that have occurred under Russia’s ongoing occupation, Georgia continues to reform its democratic institutions and develop its economy.




The United States stands with Georgia; U.S. and Georgian soldiers serve side by side in Afghanistan, where Georgia is the largest per-capita contributor to NATO’s Resolute Support Mission, and we look forward to one day welcoming Georgia into NATO. The United States continues to support Georgia’s sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders, and the United States will continue to support Georgia’s efforts to enhance the rule of law and accountable government.




Next, I’d like to thank the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for their votes earlier this week where they approved several of our outstanding ambassadorial nominees. This helps fill vacancies in American embassies all over the world and to advance American interests. We still have far too many vacancies here at the State Department, from ambassadors to regular folks here serving at the assistant secretary level, also the under secretary level.




So today we call on the Senate to help us get the finest diplomatic team on the field and get to work on behalf of the American people. A diverse group of more than 55 nominations still await the Senate’s approval. As we head to the United Nations General Assembly, it is more crucial than ever that the world’s diplomatic corps see an American team ready to execute on our foreign policy. Today we implore the Senate to act so that these candidates may take their place along the finest – alongside the finest of diplomats.




Lastly, I’d like to mention a little bit about the schedule in the coming days, as many of you will be joining us at the United Nations General Assembly. The Secretary arrives in New York on Sunday the 23rd for the 73rd Session of the UN General Assembly. The White House will be issuing the President’s schedule. Ambassador Haley, you may have seen a short while ago, just concluded a press conference highlighting some of the events that we can expect at the High-Level Week.




I thought I’d take a few moments to give you a sense of the administration’s priorities for this year’s UNGA, and they fall within five overarching themes. First among the priorities is addressing the global threat posed by weapons of mass destruction. That includes the proliferation of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, as well as ballistic missiles. The President intends to chair a UN Security Council meeting on that issue, and you can expect considerable discussion of North Korea, Iran, and Syria in this category throughout High-Level Week and beyond.




The United States will use UNGA High-Level Week to highlight humanitarian crises around the world and to encourage all nations to do more to support humanitarian response and also food security. The United States believes UN member-states can do more to address threats to peace and security, in particular the world drug problem. That’s something that the President, the First Lady, and the Secretary and others will certainly be highlighting in the early part of the week.




The United States will continue to emphasize also global initiatives to defeat ISIS, al-Qaida, and other terror groups that threaten America and its interests. We will reinforce last year’s call for member-states to support meaningful and lasting reform to ensure that the UN is serving the interests of its membership effectively, efficiently, and accountably.




Regarding Secretary Pompeo’s schedule: On Monday, Secretary Pompeo will join the President’s Global Call to Action on the world drug problem. On Tuesday, Secretary Pompeo will speak out against Iran’s proliferation in an event hosted by the United – United Against Nuclear Iran. On Tuesday, Secretary Pompeo looks forward to hosting the annual Transatlantic Dinner. He’s excited about that. We know many of our European friends are looking forward to joining that as well. On Wednesday, Secretary Pompeo will participate in an African Union meeting regarding the peace process for South Sudan. On Thursday, he’ll join the P5 foreign ministers to address some of the world’s most pressing global issues. Then on Friday, the Secretary will meet with some of our Middle East partners to address shared security goals.




Some of the other senior officials who will be in New York next week include our Deputy Secretary John Sullivan, Under Secretary David Hale, Under Secretary Andrea Thompson, our Director of Policy Planning Kiron Skinner, our Special Representative Steve Biegun, and Special Representative Brian Hook, among many others from the State Department.




The United States seeks a strong, sovereign, and independent partnership with countries that control their own destinies, and the United Nations General Assembly provides an excellent platform to advance our American interests. And I look forward to seeing you all in New York and talking with you nonstop, I am sure.




I’d be happy to take your questions.




QUESTION: Probably more than you want.




MS NAUERT: (Laughter.) And I imagine we’ll be having a few drinks together as well. So looking forward to that.




QUESTION: Shh. What was Thursday again? I’m sorry, you were going very fast and I can’t --




MS NAUERT: Let me go back to that. Bear with me one second. And we will provide updates to the schedules. As you know, with bilateral meetings, there is a lot of shifting in the schedules, and so we will provide you with the schedule in the evening and then any revised schedules in the morning.




Let’s see, Monday – bear with me.




QUESTION: No, no, Thursday is what I missed. Sorry, everyone.




MS NAUERT: Can anyone else help out Matt? Can the class help?




QUESTION: Well, we can --




MS NAUERT: Ah, excuse me. On Thursday he’ll join the P5 foreign ministers to talk about global challenges.




QUESTION: Global challenges.




MS NAUERT: More specific details, we’ll provide that for you.




QUESTION: All right.




QUESTION: Are there any specifically on Syria?




MS NAUERT: I – look, you’re all going to have a lot of questions, I understand, about a lot of these things. Syria will, of course, come up under proliferation, but any side meetings related to that, I just don’t have that for you today.




QUESTION: So --




MS NAUERT: Some of these things are still being developed, and we’ll provide you updates to the schedule on a daily basis.




QUESTION: All right, okay. Well, so I was trying to come up before this with something very profound to ask, but I failed miserably.




MS NAUERT: Okay.




QUESTION: So do you know --




MS NAUERT: I’ve bored you to tears.




QUESTION: I realize that you don’t have his exact schedule for bilats yet, but yesterday in his statement he said he had asked the North Korean foreign minister to meet with him at some point next week. Do you know, has that – is that going to happen, or is it still not going – I’m not asking for a time or a venue or a place.




MS NAUERT: I understand. So an invitation went out. I don’t have any updates for you on that. We certainly stand by ready to meet if they are able to.




QUESTION: Okay. And then the same goes for Special Representative Biegun. Do you know, has a date for the Vienna – proposed Vienna meeting --




MS NAUERT: So that --




QUESTION: Clearly, it won’t be next week if he’s going to be in New York.




QUESTION: Steve Biegun will be in New York with us and I am sure looks forward to meeting a lot of you in the coming days and weeks ahead. We don’t have anything specific on his schedule with regard to any travel to Vienna, but he stands by ready to travel.




QUESTION: Okay. And --




QUESTION: The meeting with the Middle Eastern partners, is that on Wednesday? Is that what you said? Wednesday or Friday?




MS NAUERT: I put it away. Now I have to go back and look.




QUESTION: It was on Friday.




QUESTION: Friday. Yes, okay.




QUESTION: Have any bilats been set yet?




MS NAUERT: Oh, yes, we do. But as you know, these things are shifting a lot.




QUESTION: Well, that’s fine.




MS NAUERT:So we’re not ready to announce all the specifics just yet, but we will on a daily basis get you all the information that you need so that you can plan your schedules. Okay? And Said, I’ll get back with you on that answer to that question.




QUESTION: And then I had one other logistical question.




MS NAUERT: Okay.




QUESTION: And that is the Tuesday thing, the Iran, United Against Nuclear Iran event, that is part – that’s a nongovernmental group that was very opposed to the Iran deal. I’m presuming that that is not – do you know what the venue is for that?




MS NAUERT: I don’t know where that is being held offhand.




QUESTION: Okay.




MS NAUERT: Okay. Lesley, go right ahead.




QUESTION: Can I have – yeah, can I have a follow-up? So what does – can you give us some kind of insight into what the Secretary is thinking about this next meeting with the North Koreans? Does he feel – I mean, does he want to get a list of all the North Korean nuclear facilities from the foreign minister? Where does he – where does he want to take it? Can you give us some kind of --




MS NAUERT: So I think the first thing that we want to do is get a very fulsome readout that resulted from the meeting between North Korea and South Korea. We have received a preliminary readout – as you know, we coordinate very closely with the South Koreans – but have obviously have yet to meet with them face-to-face to fully flesh out the negotiations and the conversations and how those went in North Korea. So that’s the first step.




The Secretary looks forward to speaking with them in the days to come. The President, along with – our President, along with President Moon, will have an opportunity to chat, I believe in person, in the early part of the week. So that will be the first step, having those conversations to learn in a more granular level how those conversations went.




We are open to meeting, certainly, as you well know. The Secretary put out a statement yesterday congratulating President Moon on a successful series of meetings in North Korea. We welcome the reaffirmation of the elements that were agreed to in the Singapore summit, the joint agreement, and we also welcome Chairman Kim’s decision to complete the previously announced dismantlement of various sites.




So all of that is good news. We see that as progress, and we’re prepared to engage immediately in negotiations if and when they’re ready.




QUESTION:So there’s a lot of focus on the date, the 2021. What exactly is the goal for denuclearization by that time?




MS NAUERT: Well, this is something that the Secretary has spoken to before. I think when we were in Seoul, I think you and I were sitting right there with the Secretary, Francesco, as he talked about this and highlighted the fact that we get this done pretty quickly when or as North Korea cooperates. The intention is to get this done by the time the – at the end of the President’s first term. So this is not something new. It’s somehow been interpreted as something new, but this is something that the Secretary has said before.




Okay, Francesco.




QUESTION: You didn’t mention the Secretary chairing a UNSC meeting on North Korea on Thursday. Is this still happening?




MS NAUERT: As far as I know. Let me have my colleagues double-check. Yes, it is. Yeah.




QUESTION: Yes. And then on – yesterday in his statement, the Secretary didn’t mention the fact that Chairman Kim, Kim Jong-un, is asking for corresponding measures to dismantle its nuclear complex. Are you ready to corresponding measures, which would mean a phased, step-by-step, reciprocal process?




MS NAUERT: I think I’d go back to something that Chairman Moon has often said, and that we have to have --




QUESTION: Chairman Moon?




MS NAUERT: Excuse me.




QUESTION: Chairman Moon or President Moon or Chairman Kim?




MS NAUERT: You know I always do this, right? I get tired at the end of the day and people start marrying up like that, so --




QUESTION: Yeah.




QUESTION: This is just the beginning. (Laughter.)




MS NAUERT: I think I’d just go back to what I’ve said about that very issue before, and that nothing can happen in the absence of denuclearization. Denuclearization has to come first, okay.




Hi, Janne.




QUESTION: So no corresponding measure to – for the dismantlement of the site?




MS NAUERT: Look, I don’t have any guidance on that beyond what I’ve just told you, that denuclearization is something that has to come.




Hi, Janne.




QUESTION: Hi. Thank you. North Koreans said that if United States take steps first, they will destroy or shut down Yongbyon reactors. Do you think this is successfully – Moon say that is – I don't think so – Moon does make any successful denuclearizations meeting with Kim Jong-un.




MS NAUERT: Look, I think any time that we have our government sitting down and talking with their government, that we have President Moon talking with Chairman Kim, it is a step in the right direction – a step in the right direction to start to have regular dialogue. This is something we had talked about a couple months ago, and I said these things will become regular, where it’s not such a surprise when the U.S. is having conversations, trading emails, phone calls, whatever you want to call it, having meetings with North Korea. And I think it’s just another step in that direction, okay.




QUESTION: But should North Korea not develop future nuclear weapons or should not all nuclear weapons be destroy? So what do you want? What United States want? They want a future nuclear weapons or --




MS NAUERT: Well, we’d like to see a brighter future for the North Korean people and for the North Korean Government. We hope that they would like to see the same thing. That is something that Chairman Kim had indicated to the President, that he shared that vision to have a brighter future for North Korea. That means a denuclearized North Korea. That’s something that the United States doesn’t just believe in, but many other countries have joined us in this overall mission to achieve denuclearization of North Korea, okay.




Hi. Nazira.




QUESTION: Yes, thank you. Heather, do you know that President Ghani will have meeting with President Trump or Afghan delegation, what kind of meeting they will have in New York next week?




MS NAUERT: I understand that the Afghan Government will have representation at the UN General Assembly. I don’t have any specific meetings to read out for you, especially on behalf of the President, so we’ll just have to wait for the White House to put out that – their meeting readout schedule.




QUESTION: Sure.




MS NAUERT: Okay.




QUESTION: Can we go back to North Korea?




MS NAUERT: We’ll come back to that. Hey, Abbie.




QUESTION: Hey. My apologies if I missed some of this at the top, but were you asked whether or not Secretary Pompeo will be meeting with any member of the Palestinian delegation, if there’s an attempt to be meeting with a Palestinian while he’s there? And separately, given the general feeling that often the U.S. is ganged up on on this issue, do you anticipate any sort of blowback from recent U.S. decisions to not fund UNRWA and take funding away from the East Jerusalem Hospitals?




MS NAUERT: Yeah. So I’m not aware of any meetings taking place. Again, I don’t have the full schedule, but I’m not tracking any meetings between the Secretary and the Palestinians at next week’s UN General Assembly.




To the hospital issue – and I know some of you have asked questions about that in the past, so I’ll just address that right off the bat, and you all know the news that was made there. The United States Government does not believe that it is responsible for paying for the hospital bills. Now, that may shock some people to hear that. The Palestinian Authority is the one that actually incurs these bills on behalf of Palestinian citizens and others who seek treatment at that hospital. The Palestinian Authority is solely responsible for paying for the treatment of Palestinians in those hospitals.




Historically, they have neglected to pay the bills at their hospital of those individuals and other bills related to the hospital. Our funding in the past has generously shored them up. The PA, though – we have seen the Palestinian Authority is prioritizing paying its debts – has failed to prioritize paying its debts and has instead put money into funding things like payment to families of terrorists and payment to – as you all are well aware of the Taylor Force Act – and payment to families of those who have been imprisoned. We think that that is a wrong decision, that the Palestinians should be funding the care of their own people in the hospitals and that it should not be the responsibility of the United States Government to pay those bills when the Palestinians have that money that they could choose to use on their own people, as opposed to funding the families of terrorists and those who are serving in prison.




QUESTION: Sorry, wait a second, Heather. Are you saying that the Palestinian Authority takes money that it would otherwise be using to pay for medical treatment for Palestinians in the East Jerusalem Hospital Network and instead pays – gives that money to the relatives of prisoners and people who have committed anti-Israel acts or killed --




MS NAUERT: Three words to answer that question: Money is fungible, and that is the money that we provide to different entities and groups throughout the Palestinian Authority can be used for other things. So we see that. We hope that the Palestinians will choose – the Palestinian Authority will choose to spend money on its own people at the hospital, and the United States should no longer be forced to shoulder that bill.




QUESTION: Well – but forced?




QUESTION: Forced?




QUESTION: The United States was never forced to pay Palestinian hospital --




MS NAUERT: Encouraged. The United States should no longer pick up that tab. Okay?




QUESTION: You – but you did it --




MS NAUERT: Yeah.




QUESTION: -- keep these hospitals funded because you are, as you consistently say, the most generous country on Earth.




MS NAUERT: And we --




QUESTION:So your argument is that this is not – it is not ungenerous to take away money that could be used --




MS NAUERT: No, Matt, that the Palestinian Authority could pay these bills on their own.




QUESTION: Could it? I mean, do you have the numbers to know?




MS NAUERT: Could pay these bills on their own, but you know what, they’re choosing to spend money that goes to the families of terrorists. Under the Taylor Force Act, that is something that is now established into law, and so --




QUESTION: Has someone crunched those numbers? Because the Palestinian Authority doesn’t – I mean, it takes in some money, but a lot of money is supposed to be transferred to it by Israel, and that money has been in the past withheld from it. So has someone done the numbers to show that they could actually pick up the – pick up the money that you cut from the hospital network?




MS NAUERT: I’m not sure it’s our responsibility to crunch the numbers to figure out whether or not they have enough money --




QUESTION: Well, it kind of is if you’re saying that --




MS NAUERT: -- to share in – to pay for those hospital bills. The United States has shored them up in the past. The United States Government has made the decision at this point to no longer do that.




Said, I’m sure you have some questions about this.




QUESTION: Yeah, I just have a couple of follow-up. Even in your report on terrorism yesterday, you mentioned that this agreement with Israel, paying the prisoners, goes way back to 1965. So the Israelis have agreed to this a long, long time ago. You mentioned that in your report.




MS NAUERT: I’m sorry, the Israelis have agreed to what?




QUESTION: I’m saying the payment to prisoners and so on was something that was agreed through international bodies with the Israelis even before the ’67 war. Another thing is that, on these hospitals, the funding predates the PA. It goes way back before the PA on these particular hospitals.




And my question to you is actually on settlement. It’s not a topic that you address frequently, but in fact, I know your position --




MS NAUERT: Let me – before we go on to settlements --




QUESTION: Okay. Fine.




MS NAUERT: -- and I’d be happy to address that – I just want to highlight something, in that we have heard reports the Palestinian Authority has said that it will pay money to the family of the man who murdered an American citizen, Ari Fuld. We’ve heard that report. We are looking into that. While I’m at it, because we’ve not talked about it at this briefing, let me add that we are deeply saddened by the loss of this American citizen and our condolences go out to his family and also his friends. I want to make clear that we condemn the Palestinian Authority payments to the families of prisoners, of convicted terrorists, and deceased Palestinians, and we strongly oppose any program that incentivizes those acts of violence and terror. And let me remind folks that that law, the Taylor Force Act, became law and was a bipartisan law, and that is something we continue to stand behind. Okay?




QUESTION: No, we understand this --




QUESTION: Just --




MS NAUERT: Yeah.




QUESTION: You just said that you’ve seen reports and you’re looking into it, that they will pay this – the perpetrator, the killer of this guy, but both Ambassador Friedman and Jason Greenblatt have said that they have condemned this payment, as if it was confirmed and had already happened. So are you trying to walk that confirmation back at all?




MS NAUERT: Not in the least. I just haven’t seen their tweets. I’m sorry. I just haven’t seen that today. Okay, in terms of settlements, your question.




QUESTION: Yeah, let me ask you on the settlements, because this is an issue that can be discussed at length, the payments and so on, because they’re paying the families. They’re not paying the person, the perpetrators. A lot of them have children and so on that they have nothing to do with that decision. But I – but that’s something for you --




MS NAUERT: You don’t see that happening in the United States. That’s not a normal thing to do.




QUESTION: I understand. Okay, but --




MS NAUERT: It’s not a normal – it’s not a right thing to do to pay the families of those who have murdered innocent people. I mean, that’s something that the United States Government on a bipartisan level passed a law against. It has bipartisan support.




QUESTION: They did -- I mean, I understand your condemnation.




MS NAUERT: Yeah.




QUESTION: I understand your feelings. But the day before, two Palestinian children, one 12 and one 14, were gunned down in Gaza. Were you aware of that?




MS NAUERT: I was not aware of that. I don’t have any information on that for you.




QUESTION: Okay. All right.




I wanted to ask you about the settlements. I know it is not a topic that we discuss often because you guys say, “Our position on the settlements is well known.” But I want to bring your attention to the fact that this administration has not in any way expressed outrage on the settlement activities that is just going crazy every day. There’s not a day that goes by without expropriating land, without throwing Palestinians out of their land, without taking land and so on, establishing outposts and so on. You don’t even express any outrage or you don’t call on the Israelis to stop. Are you planning to, as a show of goodwill, considering this is the time of high tensions between Palestinians and Americans, to show that America does stand by its principles and does consider these settlements to be illegal?




MS NAUERT: Said, I’ll say it one more time, and that is that the Israelis have assured the President that they will take his considerations – his concerns into consideration regarding settlements. They’ve assured the President of that. Unrestrained settlement activity does not advance the prospects for peace. We’ve been clear about that. Peace will not be easy. We all know that very well. And it will take some time, but we’re ready to sit down and help facilitate those talks when the parties are ready.




Okay. Hey, Laurie.




QUESTION: Heather, hi. Britain’s ambassador to Iraq tweeted that he had met with the Iranian ambassador about forming the next government, the next Iraqi government. And Baghdad responded with a mild statement that it was surprised. What is your view of meeting with the Iranian ambassador on the next Iraqi government.




MS NAUERT: Yeah, I can’t confirm that that meeting took place, so I’d have to refer you both to the British Government and to the Iraqi Government about that alleged meeting. But I can tell you overall we wouldn’t have any comment on that without having heard more from them.




QUESTION: I’ll send you his tweet.




MS NAUERT: Okay, thank you.




QUESTION: And another question: The KRG’s Joint Crisis Coordination Center has issued an urgent appeal for refugee support. There are still one and a half million refugees in Kurdistan. The promised aid hasn’t arrived and refugees returning to the region outnumber those going home. I know we discussed U.S. aid to Iraq, we discussed the U.S. aid to the Palestinians, but given that UNGA is next week and given this urgent appeal and the burden of the refugees being supported by the Kurdistan region, would you consider doing more to help out this – in this problem of refugee support, or at least pressing your allies to do so?




MS NAUERT: I think we’ve demonstrated very well our commitment to the Iraqi people. I can’t forecast anything that may or may not happen in the future or what decisions or policy decisions might be made. But we’ve given more than $1.7 billion in humanitarian aid since 2014 to the Iraqi – to the Iraqi people through various programs there, but I just don’t have any information about that specific program that you are asking about. I’m not even sure if the United States Government funds the program that you’re referring to.




QUESTION: The refugees are – tend to concentrate in the Kurdistan region because it is a more hospitable environment because the fighting’s been up there.




MS NAUERT: Understood.




QUESTION: And this is 1.5 million out of an indigenous population of six million. It’s a quarter of – a 25 percent increase in the normal population. They really – they’re saying we can’t cope with this anymore.




MS NAUERT: Laurie, I’ll take a look at it and see if there’s anything additional that could be in the works, and I’ll let you know if I do have something for you.




Hi, Lalit.




QUESTION: Can we go back to North Korea?




MS NAUERT: Wait, let me just get in some other people. Hold on.




QUESTION: A follow-up on Iraq?




MS NAUERT: With Iraq? Yeah, go ahead.




QUESTION: Actually I have also a follow-up on the Palestinian, but on – in Iraq there are some reports in the Arab media circulating that actually the State Department has informed the Iraqi Government that it will be held responsible for an attack by Shiite militias in Iraq on any American targets. Can you confirm that?




MS NAUERT: I can’t confirm that. I can tell you that we have said that we will hold the Iranian regime responsible --




QUESTION: That was (inaudible).




MS NAUERT: -- for attacks on our facilities. As the Secretary had talked about last week, we’ve seen Katyusha rockets fired at our facility in Basra, something also happening to our embassy in Baghdad, and as Laurie can probably attest to, weapons being fired at Kurdish facilities in the north.




We recognize that Iran continues to be a destabilizing element in the region. They continue to try to attack other governments and individuals through their proxy militias. We will hold them responsible for any loss of American life. I just want to be clear about that.




QUESTION: Sure, but the difference is already you spoke to that, and there is a congressional bill actually to support that. But I’m talking specifically about if there’s any warning to the Iraqi Government, not to the Iranian – not to the --




MS NAUERT: I’m sorry, if any what?




QUESTION: Any warning to the Iraqi Government that --




MS NAUERT: Ah, to the Iraqi Government.




QUESTION: -- they will be held responsible and therefore --




MS NAUERT: We closely coordinate with the Iraqi Government.




QUESTION: -- subjected to sanctions.




MS NAUERT: We have a terrific relationship with the Iraqi Government. I don’t have anything specific for you on that particular issue. Whether or not we’ve had any conversations with them in that regard, I just don’t have any information on that.




QUESTION: Right. And on the Palestinian issue, since you don’t have the numbers of how much the PA pays for the families who’s been involved in violence acts --




MS NAUERT: I think I’d as the Palestinian Authority that question.




QUESTION: Yeah, but I’m just saying to you now because I’m asking you, not the Palestinian Authority, that they don’t – if they don’t – if you don’t have the number, and you have the number for how much money they spent on hospitals, which reaches to the millions, where my understanding that the money that’s spent to – on the Palestinian Authority to the families in the thousands, is this – how do you respond to accusation that was the decision was politically motivated to pressure the Palestinian Authority to accept any deal because this has been paid for during many administrations before, and it’s only now you decided to take this action?




MS NAUERT: Yes, it has been paid by administrations before, and this is a relatively new administration that has the right to look at U.S. policy and also where the United States chooses to spend its money and where its resources can best be used. And this was one of the situations where the United States Government took a look at that money, how that money was being sent – spent. And I know some of you disagree with the decision, but we felt that the money could be better spent elsewhere and the Palestinian Authority should pick up the tab for its own folks at a hospital – at the hospital there. Okay?




QUESTION: Heather, it’s not for us to agree or disagree with our – with the decision of the government. It’s for us to report on what the decision is.




MS NAUERT: Mm-hmm, yeah.




QUESTION: So where is the money being better spent? Where is that money for the hospitals with the budget --




MS NAUERT: Other regional priorities, Matt.




QUESTION: Like? Like what, for example?




MS NAUERT: Other regional priorities.




QUESTION: Like what?




MS NAUERT: We’re taking a look at some of the things that --




QUESTION: Just in general.




MS NAUERT: Well, geez, Matt, I can think there are a lot of important things going on in that region.




QUESTION: Well, it’s not being spent on Syrian stabilization. That would be an important project, wouldn’t it?




MS NAUERT: You know what? It has been spent on Syria stabilization.




QUESTION: It has?




MS NAUERT: As you well know, the United States Government, through humanitarian aid and stabilization, has put in a – billions and billions of dollars into Syria. And it’s not such a bad thing that we’ve been able to call on other countries in the region to put in more, to contribute more in their neighbor’s own backyard than the United States Government had even intended to.




QUESTION: Okay. Well, the --




MS NAUERT: It’s as though some folks here think that we can never spend – we, the United States Government, can never spend enough money. We can never spend enough money to satisfy some critics’ concerns.




QUESTION: Wait, wait a second. So the --




MS NAUERT: And the United States Government has to take a look at what money we have, the taxpayer dollar, and what is the best use of our taxpayer money.




QUESTION: I get it. So you’re saying for the money for the East Jerusalem Hospital Network has been reprogrammed into Syria stabilization?




MS NAUERT: No, I did not say it has been reprogrammed into Syria stabilization.




QUESTION: I thought that’s what – is that exactly what you said, I think.




MS NAUERT: I said to you that we had spent money on Syria stabilization.




QUESTION: Oh. Well, what has the money from --




MS NAUERT: We have spent money on Syria – humanitarian aid in Syria. We continue to spend money on the fight that we have taken to ISIS --




QUESTION: Okay.




MS NAUERT: -- in the northeastern part of Syria and elsewhere, but that money will be aligned with other regional priorities.




QUESTION: Okay. Look, when you find out where the money for the East Jerusalem Hospital Network --




MS NAUERT: Okay. Lalit, go right ahead.




QUESTION: -- is going, can you tell us?




QUESTION: I had two questions.




MS NAUERT: Yes.




QUESTION: One, at the start of the briefing, you said there are a lot of – a number of State Department nominations pending before the Senate.




MS NAUERT: Yes.




QUESTION: But there are quite a few posts, important position at the State Department which has not been filled up, like there’s still secretary of state for South and Central Asia. It’s the longest period of time you don’t have that position being filled up.




MS NAUERT: I know.




QUESTION: Why has the Secretary been – not been able to fill up this position?




MS NAUERT: Well, we have a lot of terrific candidates. Some people have been pending; their nominations have been pending. Off the top of my head, I don’t know if we have a candidate for that role, but I imagine the Secretary is looking at and talking to quite a few qualified people. When we have a nomination – that would be announced by the White House – I’ll let you know. But what we would like to see done first is have the people who are already pending, who’ve already had their background checks gone through the system and are now pending in the Senate, have the Senate ask them the questions and then vote them out, and hopefully they’ll be joining us here soon, okay.




QUESTION: And secondly, there’s news about resumption of talks between India and Pakistan. The foreign minister of the two countries are planning to meet in New York sometime later this month. How do you see this development as?




MS NAUERT: Yeah, we saw that. I think that’s terrific news for the Indians and Pakistanis to be able to sit down and have a conversation together. We saw the reports about the positive messages being exchanged between Prime Minister Khan and also Prime Minister Modi, and we hope that the conditions will be set for a good, strong relationship, a good, strong bilateral relationship in the future.




QUESTION: Thank you.




MS NAUERT: Okay. Hi, Ben. Hi.




QUESTION: Yeah, just a point of clarification on yesterday’s statement. Secretary Pompeo said that the – he welcomed Chairman Kim’s decision to allow U.S. and IAEA inspectors in this dismantlement, but I don’t think that was specifically in the joint statement. So could you clarify if North Korea has given any guarantees that U.S. inspectors would be allowed to inspect?




MS NAUERT:So President Moon and also Chairman Kim did talk about inspectors, of course. Having IAEA inspectors and United States inspectors be a part of anything is really just a shared understanding. Anytime you have a nuclear situation like this, where there is a dismantlement, the expectation is that IAEA inspectors would be a part of that. So that would just be normal course of doing business. We have that shared understanding with the countries.




QUESTION: But what about the U.S.?




QUESTION: But it wasn’t specifically in the document that President Moon and Kim Jong-un signed, and the Secretary said it was.




MS NAUERT: We have had conversations with that government, with the Government of North Korea, and that is our mutual understanding. That is also the understanding between the Republic of Korea and North Korea, and that was one of the things that was discussed, according to my understanding of it, over the past few days. Again, we look forward to getting a more formal, thorough readout from the Republic of Korea as soon as we can sit down with them face to face.




Okay? Go ahead. I can do one more question. I got to go.




QUESTION: One more, yeah.




MS NAUERT: Okay. Go ahead.




QUESTION: Yeah. So Secretary Pompeo asked to meet with North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho. Does State Department still strongly believe about sanctions implementation about North Korea?




MS NAUERT: What about sanctions implementation?




QUESTION: About the need for stronger sanctions implementation on North Korea.




MS NAUERT: Without a doubt.




QUESTION: At a time when --




MS NAUERT: And it’s not just the United States that wants to see strong sanctions enforcement. Sanctions must continue to be enforced. That is something that the Secretary and Ambassador Haley addressed about two months ago when they were in New York together. It’s something Ambassador Haley addressed just earlier this week, and there are certain governments that are trying to skirt sanctions, and they should not be doing that. In order to get to the denuclearization of North Korea, sanctions must be enforced. We cannot let our foot off the gas.




Okay. Hi, how are you?




QUESTION: Hi, Heather. A question about Egypt as we’re going into the GA: Mahmoud Hussein, an Al Jazeera journalist, continues to be detained in Egypt without trial. Abdullah Elshamy was sentenced in absentia to 15 years a few days ago. And that’s just part of a larger picture of human and press rights in Egypt as decried by human rights and press freedom organizations. How prominently does the issue of press freedom and human rights in Egypt – how prominently does it feature on your radar as you go into talks at the UN?




MS NAUERT: Well, human rights issues and press freedoms are always something that we raise, not only in our bilateral relationship with many governments around the world but also in our human rights reports. And so that is something that is documented there. We’ve followed the case of your colleague, your journalist, who has been sentenced. We remain deeply concerned by the human rights situation in Egypt, including restrictions on freedom of expression, association, and also peaceful assembly. We’ve raised and we will continue to raise that issue with the Government of Egypt as we seek to highlight the importance of press freedom and human rights in many countries, including Egypt. We call on the Egyptian Government to ensure due process and to protect the fundamental human rights of all detainees. Okay?




QUESTION: Just a quick follow-up, if I may.




MS NAUERT: Yes. And this – final one, then I have to run.




QUESTION: Yeah, thank you. Mr. Pompeo announced the release of $1.2 billion in aid to the Egyptians on the 7th of September. On the 8th of September, hundreds of people were sentenced in Egypt, dozens to capital punishment. How concerned were you, and maybe still are concerned, about the time proximity between the two events?




MS NAUERT: That is not something that I have any information on for you today in terms of the events and the timeline of that. If I have anything more for you I’ll let you know. Okay. Thanks.




QUESTION: An American citizen was among the --




MS NAUERT: Oh, sorry.




QUESTION: Can I have one question please?




MS NAUERT: Go ahead, yeah.




QUESTION: An American citizen was among the 700 who were sentenced on that day.




MS NAUERT: Yes.




QUESTION: He’s been on hunger strike now for over a week. He’s a diabetic without access to insulin and his family says that his health is failing. Do you have anything on his condition and whether or not there are any efforts to have the Egyptian Government free him?




MS NAUERT: Yeah. As you know, we don’t comment on people’s particular medical cases in any kind of detailed level. I can tell you this American citizen’s case is one that we are following very carefully and very closely. It’s been raised repeatedly with the Government of Egypt and we remain in communication with Mr. Kassem and also his attorney about his particular case. We remain deeply concerned about the conviction and the sentencing of our American citizen and we’ll continue to follow that case very closely.




Okay. Thanks, everybody.




(The briefing was concluded at 3:58p.m.)







President Moon











The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

View more on U.S. Department of State's website »
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on September 20, 2018 16:36

September 11, 2018

Department Press Briefings : Department Press Briefing - September 11, 2018

Heather Nauert





Spokesperson


Department Press Briefing





Washington, DC





September 11, 2018











Index for Today's Briefing

DEPARTMENT



SYRIA/REGION



IRAN



DEPARTMENT



MIDDLE EAST PEACE



IRAN/IRAQ/REGION



MIDDLE EAST PEACE/DEPARTMENT



DEPARTMENT



CHINA/REGION



DPRK



CUBA/DEPARTMENT



DOMINICAN REPUBLIC/EL SALVADOR/PANAMA/CHINA/REGION



TURKEY/DEPARTMENT



BRAZIL



IRELAND



DOMINICAN REPUBLIC/EL SALVADOR/PANAMA/CHINA/REGION



AFGHANISTAN



EGYPT


TRANSCRIPT:







3:46 p.m. EDT










MS NAUERT: Hi, everybody. Hope you’re all well today. A couple of announcements to begin before I take your questions.




Hey, John. Welcome. We see you on the White House press briefings all the time, so nice to see you here in person. Welcome.




QUESTION: Thank you for having me today.




MS NAUERT: Yeah, thanks. I’d like to start out by calling attention to 9/11 today. We have two somber anniversaries here in the United States today, of course affecting many other countries as well.




Seventeen years ago today, nearly 3,000 Americans were killed by terror attacks. We watched today as the President went to Shanksville, Pennsylvania as our colleagues at the Department of Defense honored those who lost their lives who were killed in the terror attack on 9/11, and as the names were called out, were read out once again at the World Trade Center in New York.




Here at the State Department, we mourn our own losses here, not just with regard to what happened on 9/11 seventeen years ago, but also what happened to our colleagues six years ago. Ambassador Chris Stevens, Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, and Tyrone Woods were killed in an attack in Libya. We remember all of the lives taken on this day and we appreciate the outpouring of support that we received from our allies and partners across the world.




After September 11th, 2001, those terror attacks, U.S. embassies and consulates received flowers, candles, so many personal notes, drawings, and memorials of all different types to let U.S. citizens know that we were not alone in our pain. If you have the time, I want to urge you to visit our diplomacy center. They are set up, they are arranged there; that’ll be in position for the rest of the week. It’s a collection of some of those memories and mementos from the outpouring of support that we felt after 9/11.




In addition, I’d like to highlight the Secretary’s statement that he released last evening and mention that we want to remember the victims of 9/11. He said, “Those who were lost will never be forgotten. We continue to pray for guidance,” for “wisdom and” for “protection for the men and women in uniform who fight each,” and every “day to guard the world against terrorism, and we pray for the unity of our nation and the world in times of peril and peace.”




I’d also like to recognize my colleagues, many of whom joined the State Department in the years following 9/11. I have spoken with countless numbers of colleagues since I joined here more than a year ago who, in part, joined the State Department because of 9/11. That inspired them to want to promote peace, prosperity, and security around the world. So I’d like to thank my colleagues who joined the State Department and recognize 9/11 today.




Next, I would like to announce the start of an operation to eliminate ISIS territory in eastern Syria, a very different kind of topic. Today the Department of Defense announced the Syrian Democratic Forces, with support from the D-ISIS global coalition, launched the final phase of Operation Roundup to eliminate ISIS’s hold on territory in eastern Syria. We welcome this initiative as we continue to support our SDF partners to achieve the enduring defeat of ISIS. While the final phase will be difficult and will take time, the SDF has proven that it is a capable and effective partner in this fight, and we are confident that they will successfully liberate the remaining areas ISIS controls along the Syrian-Iraqi border. The campaign to defeat ISIS has liberated nearly eight million Syrians and Iraqis from ISIS’s barbaric rule and denied it the ability to use this territory to recruit, to train, to equip, to finance, to inspire, to plan, and to execute attacks in the region and around the world.




The enduring defeat of ISIS is a top priority of this administration. The State Department will continue to work closely with our Department of Defense colleagues to ensure success of this operation while working in parallel with coalition partners to support stabilization initiatives that enable Syrians to voluntarily and safely return to their homes to prevent the re-emergence of this terror threat.




Next, and this is also related to Syria, I’d like to highlight this: The Assad regime and Russia continue to falsely accuse the White Helmets through a massive disinformation campaign, leaving its volunteers at significant risk. Many of you are familiar with the good work that the White Helmets has – that they have done and that they continue to do. The White Helmets are a humanitarian organization that has saved thousands of lives and continues to save civilian lives after bombardments by Russian and regime military forces. The United States and the international community continue to support their heroic work.




Lastly, I’d like to turn to Iran. The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has now concluded that the Government of Iran has no legal basis for the arrest and detention of Princeton University graduate student Xiyue Wang. The UN further notes that Iran committed multiple violations of his right to a fair trial and that his depravation of liberty is arbitrary and that he should be released immediately. The safety and security of U.S. citizens will always be a priority for the United States Government. As we have said repeatedly, the allegations against Mr. Wang are baseless and his detention demonstrates that the Iranian regime does not respect the rule of law. We call on the Iranian regime to release Mr. Wang. Iran must also immediately release U.S. citizens unjustly detained and missing in Iran, including Siamak Namazi, Robert Levinson, and to respect all of its applicable international obligations and commitments.




And with that, I’d be happy to take your questions.




QUESTION: Thanks, Heather.




MS NAUERT: Matt, you want to start?




QUESTION: Yeah, please. I want to ask you about some comments that National Security Advisor Ambassador Bolton made yesterday --




MS NAUERT: Okay.




QUESTION: -- about the International Criminal Court. I’m sure there’ll be other questions about the Palestinians too, but mine are about the ICC. In his speech at the Federalist Society, Ambassador Bolton said that if they – meaning the ICC – come after us, essentially – I’m paraphrasing here – we’ll go after them. He said that the U.S. would impose sanctions on ICC employees, prosecutors, judges, even bring charges against them in the U.S. And I’d like to know what legal authority does the administration think it has to do such a thing, to either freeze assets or impose travel bans or even prosecute?




MS NAUERT: Well, Matt, as you well know, we don’t get ahead of announcements or some decisions or deliberations that the U.S. Government may be making or may be taking in the future. So I’m not going to get ahead of anything that the administration may or may not be doing, and I would just have to refer you over to Ambassador Bolton’s – his communication staff to answer your questions on that in particular.




QUESTION: He said if they come after us we’re going to go after them.




MS NAUERT: I can speak about our concerns about the International – the ICC.




QUESTION: I think that we heard plenty of the concerns yesterday from Ambassador Bolton.




MS NAUERT: Well --




QUESTION: He outlined them quite clearly. I don't think we need to go through those together again. But what I do want to know – this is not a hypothetical question. He said that this would happen, that the U.S. will impose sanctions on individual ICC employees as well as prosecute them. And I want to know where does he and the rest of the administration, presuming the rest of the administration signed off on this – where does the administration think that it gets the legal authority to do something like that?




MS NAUERT: Matt, once again – I will say it again and one last time – I’m not going to forecast any potential sanctions or actions or activities that the U.S. Government may take in the future, okay.




QUESTION: I’m not asking for forecasting. No, I’m asking you what authority the administration thinks it has to do something like that.




MS NAUERT: And for any additional information on that, I’d have to refer you to Ambassador Bolton’s staff.




QUESTION: So does that --




MS NAUERT: I can tell you, however, that here in the United States, the Constitution, the U.S. Constitution, is our highest legal authority and our highest judicial authority.




QUESTION: That’s wonderful.




MS NAUERT: And that is – I’m sorry, maybe you don’t care to hear that, but maybe there are others out there who do.




QUESTION: I --




MS NAUERT: The administration – and my job is to help discuss U.S. policy and our beliefs here at the State Department as a part of this administration. Yeah.




QUESTION: So Ambassador Bolton didn’t discuss his speech with any – the State Department doesn’t know what the legal jurisdiction is?




MS NAUERT: Nope, we are fully aware and fully informed of the speech. But for the specifics, if you’re interested in jumping ahead and looking at what actions we may or may not take in the future --




QUESTION: I’m interested in what the legal basis is for a threat like that.




MS NAUERT: -- then I’d refer you to Ambassador Bolton’s office.




QUESTION: I don't think that’s a very difficult thing for the State Department --




MS NAUERT: And I’d be more than happy to put you in touch with his people.




QUESTION: -- which runs American diplomacy, or did, for it to answer a question that is pretty – should be pretty easy to answer or, I mean, I just – I don’t get it. Because if --




MS NAUERT: Okay. Thank you for your opinions, Matt. I’ll go over to Michelle. Hi, Michelle.




QUESTION: Hi. Thanks. And by the way, Jennifer Hansler is our new producer to the bullpen, so you’ll be seeing her around a lot.




MS NAUERT: Hi, Jennifer. Welcome. Thank you.




QUESTION: Bolton also said that he thinks that it can take away from a country’s maturation if others are prosecuting their war criminals, and it prevents them from making the tough decisions. And later in his speech he – he said the same thing when he was pressed by reporters. Does the State Department share that view? Because the ICC is only supposed to work – its purpose is when an individual country’s justice system isn’t set up or working properly.




MS NAUERT: I think the preference is always for other countries to have a strong and independent judicial system. That is why we do not adhere to the International Criminal Court, because we have such a strong and independent judicial system here in the United States, not only for our U.S. service members but obviously for United States citizens as well. The preference is always for other countries to have that same type of model. Unfortunately, there are some countries that don’t have that type of model, where in certain instances – and it’s different. Every situation is different. If you’re looking at Burma, it’s a different type of situation. If you’re looking at tragedies that have happened in Rwanda, that’s a different type of situation. Sometimes tribunals are applied; sometimes other types of systems are applied as well.




QUESTION: Could I just --




MS NAUERT: Hang on.




QUESTION: When Ambassador Bolton said that countries who would cooperate with the ICC on inquiries on Americans or Israel or other allies, and then today countries like Germany and France said that they will continue to cooperate with the ICC, would that mean that those countries, close allies of the United States, would face consequences for cooperating?




MS NAUERT: I’m not going to get ahead of any decisions or any steps that the United States Government may take. But one of the key principles of this administration – and it’s laid out in our National Security Strategy as well – is sovereignty and that each country has its own sovereign rights, including our own. And encompassed in our own sovereign right is the fact that we have a fair and independent judiciary. We feel that that fair and independent judiciary more than backs up and takes care of any judicial issues that would confront – that would be in front of U.S. citizens and also U.S. service members. Okay.




QUESTION: Would you say that even close allies of the United States that would cooperate with the ICC would face consequences, sanctions, or --




MS NAUERT: Again, you’re asking me to forecast sanctions, and I’ll say --




QUESTION: He did this yesterday.




MS NAUERT: -- I think this is the fourth or fifth time – if Ambassador Bolton wants to say that, that’s certainly his right to do so. I don’t speak for Ambassador Bolton, and we’re in obviously very different positions. Very different positions in government.




QUESTION: The impression that you’re leaving, Heather, is that the State Department doesn’t know what Ambassador Bolton’s talking about.




MS NAUERT: Well, Matt, you’re flat-out wrong, okay? You’re flat-out wrong. Okay.




QUESTION: Well, then you should be able to explain it.




QUESTION: Can I --




MS NAUERT: Okay, I don’t need – I don’t need you --




QUESTION: With respect, Heather, you should be --




MS NAUERT: -- yelling at me today.




QUESTION: You should be able to explain what exactly his threats and warnings were about and what they’re based in.




MS NAUERT: And I think that’s why I say – and I will say this one last time – we are not going to forecast actions, activities, sanctions, and other steps. And I will leave it at that. Said, go right ahead.




QUESTION: Can I follow up?




QUESTION: Thank you, Heather. I have a very quick question for you. Over the weekend, the United States Government cut off aid to six Palestinian hospitals in East Jerusalem. On what basis – I mean, what was the reason for cutting that off? Because these hospitals have always operated by Lutheran church groups and so on. They provide chemotherapy for children that otherwise don’t have that kind of care. What is the justification behind that?




MS NAUERT: Yeah. So there was a – for lack of a better term, a pot of money, sort of a piece of money, if you will, that was set to expire this fall, that was set to expire September 30th. The decision was made to reprogram that money. We will evaluate the situation in the future as we go forward, and I’d just have to refer you to the White House for any additional details on that.




QUESTION: I understand, but when you say “reprogram that money,” is that – is it going to go to the same hospitals, or it – it will not go to any of these hospitals?




MS NAUERT: Well, some of this money – and we had spoken earlier about assistance funding – that had been reprogrammed as well.




QUESTION: Right.




MS NAUERT: And the decision was made on the part of the U.S. Government to reprogram that money, to put it to other types of programs not in the region – not just in the region, but also around the world – programs that we find to be, in some instances, more effective, more efficient, better – more necessary at this time, and to protect U.S. tax dollars.




QUESTION: Because they are licensed by the Israelis. I mean, the Palestinian Authority does not have any control over them or any authority over them. This is a strictly Israeli-controlled area. So did you coordinate with the Israelis before cutting off this aid?




MS NAUERT: We have close conversations with many governments around the world. I’ll leave it at that.




QUESTION: One last question. There is --




MS NAUERT: And then I’ll go to Laurie.




QUESTION: Okay. Very, very quickly. The – your European allies have complained that the Israelis are about to demolish a small Palestinian Bedouin hamlet in the West Bank called Khan al-Ahmar. I wonder if you have any comment on that issue.




MS NAUERT: Yeah. So we’re certainly familiar with the story and the situation there. We’ve been tracking that, the evacuation of that Bedouin residence, Khan al-Ahmar. My understanding is that it follows a lengthy legal process that has been underway for quite some time. It’s also our understanding that all appeals have been exhausted at this time. We understand that Israel is offering land, which includes access to water, electric, infrastructure, schools, and necessary things of that sort to the incoming residents, and I’d have to refer you back to the Government of Israel for any further information on that.




QUESTION: But you don’t approve removing these people by force, do you?




MS NAUERT: I was telling you that we have been following this, that we’ve been tracking it. We understand that it’s gone through a lengthy legal process. And beyond that, I’d just have to refer you to the Government of --




QUESTION: Wait a second, the incoming residents? What about for the outgoing residents?




MS NAUERT: Excuse me, did I – I meant the – you know what I meant, Matt. The residents.




QUESTION: No, I mean, are you talking about the people who are – the Jewish families who are going to move in?




MS NAUERT: I don’t have any information for you. I don’t have any information for you.




QUESTION: Or the Palestinian families that are going to get thrown out?




MS NAUERT: I’m talking about the Bedouin families who would be moved.




QUESTION: Oh, all right. Okay.




MS NAUERT: Laurie, hi.




QUESTION: Can I just ask – can we go back to the Bolton statements?




QUESTION: Hi. Yesterday --




MS NAUERT: I’ll get you, just a second.




QUESTION: -- Vice President Pence condemned the Iranian missile strike on Iraqi Kurdistan, the Iranian strike that targeted Iranian Kurds. Do you have a response as well to that?




MS NAUERT: I think when we look at the situation that seems to be unfolding in Iraq right now, it’s important to point out what a bad actor Iran has been in the region, around the world, and in that country in particular. Iran continues to meddle; Iran remains a bad actor in the region and in Iraq as well. And that recent attack that you’re referring to is clearly another effort to destabilize that country, that government, and destabilize the region. We condemn, as we did over the weekend in a statement, recent rocket attacks, including the one in Koya. It’s obviously a clear violation of Iraq’s sovereignty and Iraq’s rights. Iran continues to be a bad actor in the region, and we continue to support Iraq’s sovereignty. We expect Iran to fully respect the sovereignty of Iraq and other regional states and to stop this destabilizing behavior.




QUESTION: And what about – the Iranians demanded today that the (inaudible) Kurdish leadership be handed over to them and their bases closed. What’s your view of that? Is that more intervention?




MS NAUERT: Laurie, I would hesitate to respond to that because I’ve not heard that statement myself. But we support Iraqi sovereignty and the Government of Iraq. And Iraq should be making those decisions, not Iran.




QUESTION: North Korea?




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: Can I stick in Yemen --




MS NAUERT: Yeah, hold on one second.




QUESTION: I want to do the Middle East.




MS NAUERT: Hold on. We’ve got a lot of stuff going on. Go ahead, Nick, and I’ll come back to you, Michelle, since we already talked.




QUESTION: I just wanted to follow up on --




MS NAUERT: Your question is about?




QUESTION: On the PLO and the --




MS NAUERT: Okay, okay.




QUESTION: -- Bolton speech, the ICC. In his speech, he also said that one of the reasons why the PLO office in Washington was shutdown was because the Palestinians had advocated for the ICC to investigate Israel. That wasn’t mentioned in your statement yesterday. Is that a – was that a factor according to the State Department? I mean, how do you explain that discrepancy?




MS NAUERT: Well I think the concerns about the PLO office were that we had enabled the PLO office to remain open through a waiver back in 2017. And that waiver allowed for the Palestinians to take steps to advance and start a dialogue with the Israelis for some – to take steps toward a meaningful negotiation with Israel to advance the cause for peace. We have not seen that taking place. The operations that they were supposed to conduct at the PLO office here in Washington, D.C. were not advancing the cause for peace. We want them to talk about and work toward a better future for Israelis and Palestinians. They’ve rejected – the Palestinians have – a peace plan that they’ve not even seen yet. I’d like to highlight that. They continue to take hostile steps and hostile rhetoric toward the United States and other parties, and we don’t see that as a path to peace. The office could reopen in the future. They could, but we would certainly like them to take some meaningful steps in that direction of advancing peace.




QUESTION: So just to get a yes or no answer, if I could, was the Palestinians’ advocacy for the ICC to investigate Israel part of the – did that factor into the decision to close the PLO office?




MS NAUERT: Some of their rhetoric has been a long time concern of the United States Government. I think that’s been clear for quite some time.




QUESTION: Heather, but they – if I could clarify that.




MS NAUERT: Hold on. Let me just – let me try to get – let me try to get around the room, Said.




QUESTION: Okay.




MS NAUERT: Go ahead. Hi, Barbara.




QUESTION: I’m next.




QUESTION: Just a – hi. Just a question about Yemen because today is the deadline for the administration to certify whether the UAE and Saudi Arabia have met human rights provisions – congressional, in law. So are you going to be doing that? Do you know whether the State Department is going to be issuing that certification, and if so, what are – what the outcome will be?




MS NAUERT: Certainly. So I’m not going to get ahead of any announcements or determination that the Secretary would be making, but we have followed that closely, our requirement that the Secretary certify under this year’s NDAA. The Secretary intends to comply. The State Department intends to comply with Section 1290 of the NDAA. I’m not going to discuss some of the internal deliberations that have gone on with regard to that decision making or some of the factors that have weighed in to that decision. We will comply with the congressional briefing, as is required, and we will be doing that in the near future. Okay.




QUESTION: So do you know whether that – that’s happening today? Because it is the deadline.




MS NAUERT: Today/tomorrow is the deadline and we will be getting – we will comply with it and we will get that information up to Congress, as is required under the NDAA.




QUESTION: And can I quickly ask you about China as well? The – any update on what’s on the table with regards to a response to the Uighur, the Chinese actions towards the Muslim Uighurs?




MS NAUERT: Yeah. I – this is something that we have talked about on numerous occasions here at the State Department. Some of you may have – may recall that I invited a group of Uighur reporters here to the State Department back in the spring, and acknowledged them for their hard work, the good work that they do, and recognize the very difficult position that their family members, many of their family members have been put in in China. That remains a tremendous concern of the United States Government, in particular the State Department. We’re deeply troubled by the worsening crackdown, not just on Uighurs, Kazakhs, other Muslims in that region of China. There are credible reports out there that many, many thousands have been detained in detention centers since April 2017, and the numbers are fairly significant from what we can tell so far. Some of those disproportionate controls on ethnic minorities – expressions of their cultural and also their religious entities – have the potential also to incite radicalization and the recruitment of violence.




We use a variety of tools to press for progress on human rights. Part of that is outlined in our Human Rights Report as well and our Religious Freedom Ministerial. Some of you may recall that we did have some Uighurs represented here at our Religious Freedom Ministerial conference and I recall sitting in one of our very large rooms as some of these defenders of their religious freedoms, who have obviously gone through so much as a result just of their religion and their identify, to stand up in front of this room of so many delegations – and it was incredible to see some of those brave men and women be recognized by so many individuals from around the country, and there was a Uighur woman who was one of them.




QUESTION: But just to confirm whether there’s any thought of sanctions against certain - U.S. officials as Congress – as some of the lawmakers have --




MS NAUERT: Yeah, so we can certainly acknowledge that we received a note, a letter from Congress regarding that. We have a lot of tools at our disposal but I’m not going to get ahead of any potential activity that the U.S. Government may take. It’s the old standard line on sanctions, that we’re not going to preview any sanctions that may or may not happen.




Okay. Let me – okay, trying to get around the room. Hi, Janne.




QUESTION: Thank you, Heather. Two questions for you on North Korea.




MS NAUERT: Okay.




QUESTION: Last weekend Kim Jong-un, the North Korean leader, sent a letter to President Trump.




MS NAUERT: Is that so?




QUESTION: Yes. Yes, you know that.




MS NAUERT: I think I heard that somewhere.




QUESTION: You know already – that. Have you – have you received any details, list of denuclearizations, from Kim Jong-un has mentioned this?




MS NAUERT: I’m afraid you’re not going to like the answer that I give, and that would fall under private diplomatic conversations. I can confirm that the State Department did receive a letter. The President has obviously been briefed on that letter. Some of those conversations will be, of course, between the Secretary and the President. We don’t read out those conversations between the Secretary and the President and the national security team. But then the letter was addressed to President Trump, and so that would certainly be for the White House to disclose the contents of that letter or for Chairman Kim and his government to disclose the contents.




QUESTION: But will the Secretary Pompeo prepare to visit North Korea again?




MS NAUERT: We have no preparations, no plans to hop on a plane anytime soon, but I can tell you Flat Stanley he’s burning a hole in my pocket and he really wants to go. (Laughter.)




QUESTION: Okay. Thank you.




QUESTION: On North Korea?




MS NAUERT: Yeah. Hey, Michelle.




QUESTION: Just quickly, I have two quick questions on discussions. A couple of weeks ago – I think it was two weeks ago or so – you mentioned that the U.S. and North Korea have dialogue at – every day or every other day, nearly daily.




MS NAUERT: Frequent dialogue, you’re right.




QUESTION: Is that still happening?




MS NAUERT: Yes. Mm-hmm.




QUESTION: Okay. And --




MS NAUERT: Yeah, we continue to have conversations with the North Korean Government at different kinds of levels. As many of you know, we issued a readout – excuse me, not a readout – a media note about our North Korea new Special Representative Steve Biegun’s trip to the region – he is not in North Korea, just want to make that clear – but South Korea, Japan, and then also China to have conversations with our partners and allies in the region about this very topic.




QUESTION: And speaking – speaking of dialogue, what kinds of conversations would you say the State Department has had with Russia over their possible role in the health attacks on diplomats in Cuba and China?




MS NAUERT: Okay, we’re switching gears here significantly.




QUESTION: Can we just – do you have – do you have anything to say about Biegun’s travel so far?




MS NAUERT: We will – he has had some good meetings, some positive meetings. Hold on one second, I do have a couple pieces of information on that and we’ll get a full readout from him upon his return, and then, Michelle, I’d be happy to go over to the issue of Cuba.




QUESTION: Sure.




MS NAUERT: Steve sent me a note earlier today and he said we have some hard work to do, we also have a tremendous opportunity. We need to do everything that we can to make the most of this moment. The beginning – the beginning half is done and this is just the beginning, so what we need to do is continue finishing the job. Obviously, a lot of work left to be done and we’re thrilled to have Steve Biegun in the region handling that right now.




QUESTION: Where did he – wait, this was after his meetings with who?




MS NAUERT: I believe this was – I’ll double-check on that for you, okay?




QUESTION: Okay. And he is where right now? I’m sorry.




MS NAUERT: He left Seoul and I believe he is in – let me double-check. I --




QUESTION: China.




MS NAUERT: He is in China now.




QUESTION: Okay.




MS NAUERT: Okay.




QUESTION: Okay. But you can find out where he sent that from?




MS NAUERT: Correct, yes. I will find that.




QUESTION: And Heather, did he meet with any North Koreans on the trip at all?




MS NAUERT: Not to my knowledge, no. Our --




QUESTION: Okay.




MS NAUERT: My understanding is that our meetings were just with the Chinese Government, with the North – excuse me – the South Korean Government, and also the Japanese Government.




QUESTION: And one thing: Can you just explain to us why the White House is considering right now another meeting between Trump and Kim Jong-un when just a few weeks ago you said now is not the time for a meeting like that --




MS NAUERT: Well --




QUESTION: -- with the Secretary of State?




MS NAUERT: -- that was just a couple weeks ago, right?




QUESTION: Well, what’s changed?




MS NAUERT: And things change over time. Conversations happen, dialogue happens, those types of things occur. And so clearly between then and now there has been some change in our posture and position. I think Sarah Sanders addressed this yesterday, and so I would just leave it at that. I think she handled that and explained it fairly well.




QUESTION: And are you seeing different messages coming from Kim Jong-un versus his diplomats who are meeting with U.S. officials?




MS NAUERT: I can’t speak to that. I can’t speak to that today.




Hey, Conor.




QUESTION: Just one quick follow-up on that.




MS NAUERT: Yeah.




QUESTION: If it’s now appropriate for the President to meet again with Kim Jong-un, would it – why not – why wouldn’t it be appropriate for Secretary Pompeo to head to Pyongyang again as well?




MS NAUERT: For him to what?




QUESTION: To go back to Pyongyang.




MS NAUERT: I’m just saying we don’t have any trips, any meetings to announce at this time, so we’ll let you know if and when that changes, okay?




Hey, Carol.




QUESTION: Hey, Heather. Say, on Cuba and the mystery ailments for the diplomats, is there any sort of new evidence – any sort of new evidence that has elevated Russia as a suspect, or --




MS NAUERT: No.




QUESTION: -- is it just continuing, it’s on the list? Is there anything that has changed?




MS NAUERT: So thank you for asking that question. We have seen a – sort of a firestorm of reports out there today assigning blame to the Russian Government according to some unnamed U.S. Government officials. I would caution you all to be very skeptical of those officials’ statements right now. As you should be aware, the investigation continues into what has caused what we have – what we have called health attacks on our State Department employees who have been working in Cuba. There is no known cause, no known individual or group believed to be responsible at this time. We are looking into it. Our position has not changed. The investigation is ongoing. We have not assigned any blame and we continue to look into this, so I want to be very clear about this.




QUESTION: Is it still considered an attack?




MS NAUERT: We still consider it to have been a health attack in Cuba, yes.




QUESTION: Has the State Department had conversations with Russia about this?




MS NAUERT: I – Michelle, I don’t know about that offhand. I’d have to go back and double-check. We have lots of conversations with the Russian Government and many other governments about all kinds of issues, but I just don’t – I don’t have an answer for you on that one, okay?




Hey, Ben.




QUESTION: Hi. Can I ask you – recently you put out a statement saying the State Department called back ambassadors from Dominican Republic, El Salvador, and Panama. Could I ask, was this related to – at all to those governments cutting off ties with Taiwan? Why did you call them back? What did you want to discuss with them?




MS NAUERT: We made the decision to call back three ambassadors – you’re correct about that – Dominican Republic, El Salvador, and also Panama, to the United States, to Washington for consultations relating to recent decisions – and this gets to the answer of your question – decisions to no longer recognize Taiwan. Those chiefs of mission will meet with U.S. Government leaders to talk about ways in which the United States can support strong, independent, democratic institutions and economies throughout Central America and also the Caribbean. They’ll be in Washington through September the 14th.




And if I could just make a quick mention of something: that we see Taiwan as a democratic success story. It is a reliable partner to the United States and a force for good in the world. The United States will continue to support Taiwan as it seeks to expand its already significant contributions to addressing global challenges and as Taiwan resists efforts to constrain its appropriate participation on the world stage. And I think I’ll just – I’ll leave it at --




QUESTION: Do you have any sort of concerns of China trying to influence these countries that have official ties with Taiwan?




MS NAUERT: I think we recognize overall the importance worldwide of development and infrastructure and the need to improve infrastructure all over the world, whether it’s on the African continent, in South America, you name it. We like to emphasize to all countries that they have a sovereign right to develop on their own terms, to seek loans on their own terms that benefit those countries. This falls into sort of the sovereignty category, that they have a right to choose that, but one thing that we certainly caution other countries around the world – we believe that those terms need to be transparent and fair.




QUESTION: Heather?




MS NAUERT: Hey, John. Go right ahead.




QUESTION: Can I follow up on the same question?




MS NAUERT: Go ahead. No, go ahead. That’s okay.




QUESTION: John.




MS NAUERT: Yeah.




QUESTION: Thank you, Heather. Thank you for the nice recognition. I have three brief questions.




MS NAUERT: I just want to see the glasses thing.




QUESTION: Okay




MS NAUERT: Yeah.




QUESTION: Here you go.




MS NAUERT: Yeah. Yeah, that, that. (Laughter.) I’ve always wanted to see that. Okay.




QUESTION: All right.




MS NAUERT: In real life. Okay, go right ahead.




QUESTION: I’ll give you an exclusive performance later. (Laughter.)




MS NAUERT: I look forward to that.




QUESTION: Three questions.




MS NAUERT: Yes.




QUESTION: The State Department would be involved with any kind of meeting that the President has with President Erdogan when the UN opens its session. Is there any discussion so far of a meeting between the President and President Erdogan of Turkey?




MS NAUERT: That would be for the White House to announce if that were the case. I will be having some meetings in the coming days to learn more about what our agenda and our schedule will be. If I can get anything for you on that, I’ll be sure to let you know. Today I don’t have any information on that, though.




QUESTION: Yesterday, Sarah told us at the White House that while the President himself has not yet called Jair Bolsonaro, the presidential candidate in Brazil who was stabbed, other administration officials have reached out to Mr. Bolsonaro and his family to express their feelings and wish him a speedy recovery. Has anyone from the State Department called or --




MS NAUERT: I would certainly think we would have. I’m afraid I just don’t have any information for you on that today, but I can look into it and get back to you with an answer.




QUESTION: Would you do that?




MS NAUERT: Yes, I’d be happy to.




QUESTION: Yeah.




MS NAUERT: (Inaudible) just take that question.




QUESTION: And finally, there’s been some confusion about the President’s trip to Ireland. Ireland says it is over, or so it sounded in its official statement. The White House said it’s a matter of working out some scheduling glitches that are there. Is there going to be a trip to Ireland?




MS NAUERT: I’m not aware of that if there is or if there is not. What’s our address here? 2230 C --




QUESTION: 2201.




MS NAUERT: 2201, there we go.




QUESTION: Right.




MS NAUERT: So I’m not at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, so I can’t answer some of those questions.




QUESTION: Okay.




MS NAUERT: My apologies. If I get anything for you on that, I’ll be sure to let you know. Okay?




QUESTION: Okay.




MS NAUERT: And I’m going to have to wrap it up. Last question, go right ahead.




QUESTION: Thank you very much. So on Taiwan, the United States cut official ties with Taiwan in 1979. So now, why countries like El Salvador should be punished or be warned because – to cut the official ties with Taiwan for the same reason the United States did in 1979?




MS NAUERT: I think – let me just go back to saying we have a relationship with Taiwan. We see it – we don’t see it as particularly advantageous to revise a set of practices that have caused us to – that have enabled us, excuse me, to maintain close unofficial relations with Taipei and develop relations with Beijing. Basically, short answer is this is the kind of relationship that works for us. It doesn’t necessarily work for every other government.




QUESTION: Is this something that the Chinese vice foreign minister came to State Department and discussed with Secretary Sullivan yesterday?




MS NAUERT: I don’t have any readouts on that meeting now for you. Okay.




QUESTION: Heather, I need to get in two quick ones.




MS NAUERT: Sure.




QUESTION: You can’t just wrap this up after half an hour. There’s been a lot going on.




MS NAUERT: Oh Matt, oh Matt.




QUESTION: It’s a lot of people that – look, one, there are some Taliban folk talking – well, I don’t know about “folk” – there’s some Taliban guys talking about a second meeting, having a second meeting with U.S. officials and discussing any number of things from – ranging from, one, prisoner exchanges to possibly power-sharing agreements. Is this something the U.S. would be interested in, having a second discussion with them?




And then my second one is about aid to Egypt.




MS NAUERT: Okay. Let me take your second question first. I don’t have – I --




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MS NAUERT: About – actually, I’ll come back to Egypt. In terms of meeting with the Taliban, as you suggest that that is something that they had floated, we have no meetings to announce. We have no – nothing scheduled to announce for you at this time. We’re ready to work with the people of Afghanistan, the Government of Afghanistan, and to talk to the Taliban all together to bring an end to the conflict. As I addressed at the top of this, we’ve been engaged in Afghanistan for 17 long years. The United States has made serious efforts, contributions, has experienced loss of life, of course, with so many service members having served their country very nobly in Afghanistan. That doesn’t compare to the number of Afghans that have been lost in 17 years of war there. It is important that any peace conversations, any peace talks remain Afghan-led and Afghan-owned. Our role is to support the Government of Afghanistan.




QUESTION: And then on Egypt real quick. On Friday, you guys informed Congress that you were planning to obligate 1.2 billion in foreign military financing and military aid for Egypt. On Saturday, an Egyptian court sentenced a whole raft of people to death and extremely lengthy prison terms for taking place in protests, including an American citizen. And I’m wondering how you square the two. I mean, was the U.S. – did the U.S. know or have any idea in advance that these convictions were going to be coming? Because this kind of assistance had been held up in the past due to human rights concerns, and it would seem to me that these convictions would be a human rights concern. And it would seem to me that, at least on the face of it, unless there’s some deal going on behind the scenes, that this is kind of a slap in your – slap to your face.




MS NAUERT: Well, among the convictions that you’re speaking about – you had a citizen – Moustafa Kassem is one of them. And we are deeply concerned about his conviction and his sentencing. He’s a U.S. citizen. His case has been raised repeatedly with the Egyptian Government. We remain in communication with Mr. Kassem and his attorney about his case. The Department of State takes very seriously its responsibilities to assist U.S. citizens abroad. He, of course, is among those, and we will continue providing appropriate consular services and continue our conversations with the government about that case.




QUESTION: But you – so there’s no link between this aid – this assistance being released and – again, you don’t see a link between the two?




MS NAUERT: Matt, I don't have any updates for you on the aid issue. Okay? Thanks, everybody. Great to see you.




(The briefing was concluded at 4:23 p.m.)




DPB # 45









The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

View more on U.S. Department of State's website »
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on September 11, 2018 16:24

August 29, 2018

Department Press Briefings : Department Press Briefing - August 29, 2018

Heather Nauert





Spokesperson


Department Press Briefing





Washington, DC





August 29, 2018











Index for Today's Briefing

DEPARTMENT



INDIA



DEPARTMENT



UZBEKISTAN



YEMEN/SAUDI ARABIA/REGION



MIDDLE EAST PEACE



SYRIA/REGION



DPRK/REGION



INDIA



DPRK/REGION



DEPARTMENT


TRANSCRIPT:







2:54 p.m. EDT










MS NAUERT: Good afternoon. You’re probably wondering why we are briefing on a Wednesday. Why not? I thought some of you might enjoy an extra-long weekend; if anyone wants to feel free to take off tomorrow we’ll certainly write you a slip to go.




I wanted to mention yesterday I was at the Department of Defense, and saw your digs over there, or your colleagues’ digs. I saw your colleague, Jennifer Griffin, Rich, and saw some CNN folks as well. If you’ve not been over there – boy, that’s nice. I mean, they really have a great setup over there. So your colleagues said don’t tell that to our State Department colleagues.




QUESTION: Is it better than ours?




MS NAUERT: Yes, they have nice big offices.




QUESTION: Do they have rats? (Laughter.)




MS NAUERT: I did not ask about rats, but it was very, very nice, and I want to thank my colleague Dana White for having me over there.




QUESTION: They have WiFi, right?




MS NAUERT: I don’t know if they have WiFi.




QUESTION: I think they do, yes.




MS NAUERT: Yes, yes. (Laughter.) But we were actually over there talking about the India 2+2 meeting that is coming up, which I wanted to make a little announcement about that today, and mention that Secretary Pompeo looks forward to traveling to New Delhi with Secretary Mattis for the inaugural India 2+2 ministerial dialogue that takes place starting on September the 6th. They’ll meet with their Indian counterparts, External Affairs Minister Swaraj and Defense Minister Sitharaman, to discuss enhancing our engagement with India on critical diplomatic and security priorities. The dialogue is an indication of the deepening strategic partnership between our two countries, and India’s emergence as a net security provider in the region.




The importance of the U.S.-India strategic partnership is highlighted in the President’s National Security Strategy as well as the administration’s South Asia and Indo-Pacific strategies. So we look forward to that and look forward to having some of you travel along with us.




Next, I’d like to recognize a colleague of mine who is moving on to his next posting and will be preparing to head to Moldova. Some of you may know Joe Geraghty, who’s worked in the European Affairs bureau, and I just wanted to recognize Joe for truly being one of the best press officers here in the building. My first day, about 16 months ago, he helped get me prepped up to start briefing all of you, and he’s really been fantastic. So I just wanted to wish him and his family well as he moves on to his new post.




Last thing I’d like to highlight, and that is something we’re really proud of that’s taking place in Uzbekistan right now. Earlier today, our U.S. ambassador to Uzbekistan, Pamela Spratlen, joined the deputy justice minister of Uzbekistan to welcome the American Councils for International Education to Uzbekistan. That group is based here in Washington, D.C. The American Councils implements U.S. educational programs and exchanges worldwide. It will be the first U.S. Government – excuse me, the first U.S. NGO organization registered in Uzbekistan for more than 15 years. It demonstrates our growing strategic partnership between the United States and Uzbekistan, and the Government of Uzbekistan’s commitment to meaningful reform and international engagement. The welcome news represents our two countries’ strengthening of people-to-people ties as American Councils will open up many opportunities for academic and cultural exchanges between the United States and Uzbekistan.




And as you may recall, we invited that country to attend our religious freedom ministerial here at the State Department back in July in recognition of the recent steps that the Government of Uzbekistan has taken to improve religious freedom. We commend the government for its significant progress that it’s made in implementing the president’s reform agenda.




And with that, I’d be happy to take your questions. Go ahead, Suzanne.




QUESTION: Yeah, I’d like to ask about something that we didn’t really get a chance to talk about too much yesterday.




MS NAUERT: Okay.




QUESTION: Yemen and the UN report that was out this week that detailed possible war crimes there. I’d just like to get your view on this report, and the Secretary’s view. And I was interested if this is something that you expect will inform U.S. policy moving forward.




MS NAUERT: Yeah. Give me one second. I’ve got Yemen back here, and it takes a bit to get to.




Okay. First, let me start by saying that Secretary Mattis and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General – Chairman Dunford addressed this to great extent yesterday in their press briefing, so I would just add on to their comments that they made yesterday. In terms of the UNHCR report that you ask about, we’ve seen that report to the Human Rights Council. The possible violations of international law as outlined in that report are very concerning to the United States Government. We believe that if such crimes have taken place, that there is simply no justification for those types of crimes. We take the report seriously. We’re certainly taking a look at the report and urge all parties to the conflict to do the same.




This serves as a good reminder that all parties to the conflict need to comply with their obligations under the Law of Armed Conflict to thoroughly investigate alleged violations of the Law of Armed Conflict and take necessary measures to prevent such violations. And that report I think gets us back to something that we have long supported, and that is a political solution to take place in Yemen. Martin Griffiths, who represents the United Nations as its special envoy, has a meeting coming up – I believe it’s within the next week or so. So we’re hoping to have some additional information and possibly some progress coming out of those meetings. And I’d be happy to bring you more when we do have it on that.




QUESTION: Yeah, but do you expect that this could maybe cause the U.S. to reevaluate support for the Saudi-led coalition?




MS NAUERT: Yeah, I’m not going to get ahead of that. I think that Secretary Mattis addressed that yesterday. And so I would just urge you to go back and read his comments. Saudi Arabia is obviously a strong strategic partner of the United States and we work with Saudi Arabia on a host of issues because we have a very broad relationship with that government. As we have discussed for the past several weeks, they are conducting an investigation; that’s something that the U.S. Government has encouraged them to do so, and they have accepted that and they have given us assurances that they will conduct that investigation fully.




Okay. Hey, Lesley.




QUESTION: Yeah, I do have a follow-up on that one. Does that mean – you said you were reviewing the report. Does that mean that aid or any kind of assistance could be implicated depending on whatever your finding is? Or, I mean, I’m trying to find out what the – what the endpoint could be on that.




MS NAUERT: Yeah, I’m not going to get ahead of any of the decisions that may or may not be made in the future with regard to that, but just want to say that we take those findings seriously and we’re urging parties to the conflict to do the same thing.




QUESTION: And then how long will your review take? Or you don’t have a deadline for that?




MS NAUERT: I don’t. I don’t know if there is a deadline on that or how long that that will necessarily take, but I think we will spend the time necessary to review it as appropriate.




Okay. Okay. Hey.




QUESTION: Just a quick follow-up on that?




QUESTION: I have a question on Palestinian aid.




MS NAUERT: Okay.




QUESTION: Can you confirm reports that a decision was made to cut the whole U.S. funding to the UN Agency for Palestinian Refugees?




MS NAUERT: No, and we have covered this extensively here in this briefing room. That issue is – the funding is still under review and we have no announcements to make at this time.




Said.




QUESTION: Can I follow up on the aid?




MS NAUERT: Sure.




QUESTION: The question that I asked about yesterday. There was a report yesterday afternoon that Congress actually rejected the aid cuts, the international aid cuts, as it was submitted. Does that include the Palestinian aid package? Are you aware of that?




MS NAUERT: I’m sorry, I don’t have any information on that. I’m just not aware of Congress’s position on that.




QUESTION: Well, congressional staffers said that. Some – there was some – some of this information was attributed to high officials in the administration. So you cannot confirm?




MS NAUERT: I’m sorry, I just don’t have anything for you on that.




QUESTION: If I could stay with the Palestinian issue for a --




MS NAUERT: Sure.




QUESTION: -- minute. Also, the – an Israeli court ruled yesterday that settlements that are deemed illegal by the United States on private Palestinian land, which you have complained about in the past and in fact protested with the Israelis, that now they are legal depending on good faith. I don’t know what that means, if the land was taken from Palestinians in good faith then they can build settlements. Do you have any reaction to that? Do you plan on protesting, as you have done in the past, on these particular settlements?




MS NAUERT: The only thing I can tell you is that the President has made his position on settlements very clear, and I’ll state that position once again, and that is that the Israeli Government has made it clear to the U.S. Government that its – intends to adopt a policy regarding settlement activity that is in line with the President’s overall concerns, and that the Israelis will take that into consideration, and that’s something that we certainly welcome. What we want to get to is a comprehensive peace deal between the Israelis and the Palestinians, and we’ll keep pushing ahead for that.




QUESTION: But on the issue of this privately owned Palestinian – you have taken a very strong stance in the past every time it happened that you object to this. What – do you plan on doing the same for this particular --




MS NAUERT: Well, we have said in the past --




QUESTION: Okay.




MS NAUERT: -- about unrestrained settlement activity, and we have made our position very clear with the Israeli Government. We’ve spoken about that. They have made it clear that they intend to adopt a policy concerning settlement activity that is in line with the President’s concerns and that they will take that into consideration. Okay.




QUESTION: And lastly – I promise lastly on this issue – the Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas told Israeli academics yesterday that the Palestinians want an unarmed or disarmed Palestinian state. Is that a good step? Is that something that you would encourage? What is --




MS NAUERT: I’m not – I’m sorry, Said, I’m just not familiar with his comment so I wouldn’t want to comment on anything that I have not seen myself, but thank you.




Hi, Elise.




QUESTION: Hi. On Syria.




MS NAUERT: Yes.




QUESTION: There’s a report out there that a U.S. delegation met with members of the Assad regime in Damascus recently. I was told you might have something.




MS NAUERT: Yeah. So we have seen that report. When I say “yeah,” that’s a figure of speech. That is not a yes. We’ve seen that report. It doesn’t reflect any reality that we are certainly aware of, so that is all I have on that. We’ve seen that report; it doesn’t reflect anything that the U.S. Government is tracking at this point.




QUESTION: Well, are you saying that you don’t know of a meeting between U.S. Government officials and Assad regime officials?




MS NAUERT: I am not aware of any meeting to that effect.




QUESTION: Okay.




MS NAUERT: If we – if we have anything more on that for you, I’ll let you know. Okay.




QUESTION: Heather?




QUESTION: A follow-up on Syria, if you don’t mind.




MS NAUERT: Yes.




QUESTION: Yesterday you mentioned – you warned against any possible chemical weapons attack in – by the Russians or the Syrian Government, and in – afterwards I had in my mind – I was like, where did this come from? And do you – is it that the U.S. believes that there is an offensive about to happen in Idlib or --




MS NAUERT: I think what we are concerned about is not just a potential chemical weapons attack, but we’re concerned about the threat, any kind of escalation of violence in Idlib. That would put civilians and civilian infrastructure in Idlib at risk. We have shared the concerns that we have about any potential offensive taking place. We’ve shared those concerns with the Russian Government at many levels, from Secretary Pompeo to his counterpart, to Chairman Dunford, also to Secretary Mattis, National Security Advisor Bolton and others. So we’ve made our position on that very clear. In addition to that, our new Syrian envoy, Ambassador Jim Jeffrey, has discussed that as well with some of his counterparts.




QUESTION: But you – it’s not that you have evidence of chemical weapons or of them assembling chemical weapons, just a warning?




MS NAUERT: Nothing that I can – nothing I can share with you at this point, so I wouldn’t want you to jump too far ahead and jump to any kind of conclusions on that. That of course is a concern of ours. We know those types of things have been used in Syria in the past.




QUESTION: Heather, conversely --




QUESTION: Two things on – wait --




MS NAUERT: Hold on. Hold on.




QUESTION: Two things on that. First of all, when you say that Ambassador Jeffrey has been discussing it with his counterparts, do you mean his Russian counterparts or is he in – is he empowered with kind of sending message directly to the Syrian regime?




MS NAUERT: I – no, I’m talking about Russia here.




QUESTION: Okay.




MS NAUERT: Ambassador Jeffrey and Ambassador David Satterfield met earlier this week with the Russian ambassador to the United States, in part to raise concerns about what could happen in Idlib.




QUESTION: Okay, just – and on that, I mean, obviously if they’re kind of – mention these warnings about what can happen, are you looking at the situation on the ground and you’re – and you see some indications that there’s going to be an offensive underway?




MS NAUERT: We’re concerned about it. I mean, you’ve seen the – you’ve read the Russian reports, you’ve heard their rhetoric, and so we’re concerned about what could potentially happen.




QUESTION: Well, it’s not just rhetoric. I mean, aren’t there indications that the Syrians are moving some equipment around?




MS NAUERT: Yeah, I can’t comment on that in particular. That would be more of an intelligence matter or a Department of Defense matter, but we’ve seen the reports about that and of course we’re concerned, concerned about the potential impact on civilians and also infrastructure as well, in a country that has been through so much.




QUESTION: When you say that Ambassador Jeffrey talked to his – and Ambassador Satterfield talked to their Russian counterparts, was this about – in general about an escalation in Idlib or specifically about the use of chemical weapons?




MS NAUERT: Well, it talked about the situation in Syria. They covered that, with a particular focus on U.S. indications of an impending Syrian regime offensive. So that’s obviously supported by Russian forces and Iranian forces, and that is something that is of concern to them and to us.




QUESTION: So you do say that there are indications of an offensive. Does that mean including the use of chemical weapons?




MS NAUERT: Elise, I don’t have anything more for you on that. If I do, I will certainly let you know, but that is a concern of ours. We have all seen what the Syrian regime, backed by the Russian Government, has done in the past. That should not be a surprise to anyone that that would be a concern of ours once again.




QUESTION: Heather.




QUESTION: Heather, on --




MS NAUERT: Hi, Janne.




QUESTION: Thank you very much. On North Korea (inaudible).




QUESTION: On the – on this chemical weapons issue, the Russian – just a quick follow-up.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: Just a quick follow-up on Elise’s --




MS NAUERT: Okay, just briefly, go ahead.




QUESTION: Really very briefly. The Russians are claiming that al-Nusrah and other groups are stockpiling chemical weapons and planning an attack. So you dismiss that out of hand?




MS NAUERT: I think that’s more false flag type reporting.




QUESTION: They’ve been talking about this for a while.




MS NAUERT: We’ve seen that before --




QUESTION: So you dismiss it?




MS NAUERT: -- where they try to put the blame, they try to put the onus on other groups, and we don’t buy into that. Go ahead, Janne.




QUESTION: Thank you, Heather. On North Korea, U.S. Ambassador to United Nations Nikki Haley mentioned that North Korea is threatening to nullify the denuclearization talks. What is your comment that --




MS NAUERT: That they’re threatening to what?




QUESTION: Nullify the denuclearization --




MS NAUERT: I have not read that quote from Ambassador Haley. I’ve read most of her quotes. I don’t recall having seen that one. I can just say diplomacy is something that we will be pushing ahead with, and that has not changed.




QUESTION: One more: The North Korea travel ban is lifted or is it extended?




MS NAUERT: As far as I know, that is – our policy has not changed on that. If and when we have some change to let you know about, I’ll let you know.




QUESTION: But expires at the end of this month.




MS NAUERT: Okay, well then that’s the end of this month. I will take a look at it and see if we --




QUESTION: Two days left.




MS NAUERT: I’ll see if we have any updates for you on that.




QUESTION: All right, thank you.




MS NAUERT: Hey, Ben.




QUESTION: Yeah, thanks, Heather. Two questions on North Korea. First, yesterday you took a question whether Secretary Pompeo had spoken with his North Korean counterpart after the cancellation of the trip. Have you gotten an answer yet?




MS NAUERT: I did not ask for an answer on that. My apologies, it just slipped my mind.




QUESTION: Okay. If you can ask that, and then maybe not the Secretary but --




MS NAUERT: I’ll see what I can find out for you. You know we often don’t talk about our private diplomatic conversations. If there is something I can share with you, I will. I may not be able to, however.




QUESTION: Okay, and the second question is: You said diplomatic efforts are ongoing as far as denuclearization, but it seems the cancellation of this trip is sort of a setback. And then in the statement you read, you said that America stands ready to engage when it’s clear Chairman Kim stands ready to deliver on his commitments he made. Does that mean the U.S. is waiting to see what North Korea does, or are you guys going to do anything to try and maybe add any more pressure to get North Korea to sort of deliver on their promises?




MS NAUERT: I think I would say we always stand ready to engage. Those – some of these things are diplomatic conversations that we’re not going to read out. I know it’s frustrating to a lot of reporters because we’re not giving you the tick-tock on everything. The President decided to postpone this trip because he felt like it was not the time to go on this trip, and when we have something more for you on that, we’ll let you know, okay?




QUESTION: Can I follow up on that?




MS NAUERT: Okay, hold on. Go ahead.




QUESTION: Just – is Steve Biegun – are there plans that he goes on his own to North Korea without Secretary Pompeo or --




MS NAUERT: I don’t have any travel on Steve Biegun to read out at this point or to announce at this point, but I know he will be traveling in the region sometime probably within the next several weeks or so to meet some of his counterparts in other countries. Whether – whether or not he ends up going to North Korea at some point, I’m not going to forecast that. We have no travel to announce, but at some point he will be going to the region to meet some of his counterparts.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MS NAUERT: Hey. Hold on.




QUESTION: I have two questions, one regarding when President Trump announced to cancel Secretary Pompeo’s trip. One of his tweets, he also – he blamed China not putting enough pressure on North Korea. I’m wondering if Secretary Pompeo has talked to his Chinese counterparts and is the United States considering any more sanctions on Chinese companies.




MS NAUERT: Well, you know we never forecast sanctions, so that’s just something I will not address. But I can tell you that – and we say this about many other countries around the world – that certain countries – all countries can do more to adhere to sanctions. We would expect China, just like other countries, to adhere to the UN Security Council resolutions that it too voted for. So we’d just remind folks of that, but certainly we would expect other countries to continue to live up to its expectations with regard to imposing sanctions and seeing those sanctions through.




QUESTION: And I’m sure you have seen the report about a secret meeting between Japan and North Korea in Vietnam in July, and it was reported that United States was irritated by this meeting. I’m wondering if you have any comment on this report.




MS NAUERT: Yeah, I can’t confirm any kind of meeting of that sort. I can tell you, though, that the U.S. and Japan, just like the U.S. and South Korea, are very closely coordinated. They talk, we talk, I would say virtually every single day. I’ve sat in on some of those meetings with the South Koreans and the Japanese, and we are all in coordination, singing out of the same hymn book, as some of us here in the United States would certainly say, and that is something that has not changed. We still remain in close coordination on many things.




QUESTION: Heather, on that note, there’s, I don’t know, a big report out from South Korea that Secretary Pompeo sent a letter to his South Korean counterpart kind of explaining why he didn’t travel to North Korea, that the time wasn’t right --




MS NAUERT: Yeah, I saw that report earlier. I’m not sure why that – I can’t confirm that. He spoke with his South Korean counterpart. That I can confirm. We put out a readout of that call, but any supposed letter, I’m not familiar with that in any way, shape, or form.




QUESTION: Okay. Thanks.




QUESTION: I just have a quick follow-up on South Korea. While Pompeo canceled his trip, South Korea has announced that they’re going to continue with talks with North Korea, and I’m just wondering is there concern that that could undercut U.S.-North Korea talks or that South Korea and the U.S. are out of sync on this issue --




MS NAUERT: And I’ve started to see some reporting about that, claiming that there is a rift between South Korea and the United States, and I can just say that that notion is simply overblown. There is no reality to that. I was just talking about how we closely coordinate with Japan. We closely coordinate with South Korea. We couldn’t have gotten to this point where we have been having conversations with North Korea without the assistance of South Korea and without the assistance of Japan, and without a lot of other countries for that matter, but those two key allies helped get us to that position. So while we may have minor disagreements here and there on different kinds of policy issues, all of this narrative is simply overblown. We closely coordinate and have an excellent relationship with these countries and share information all the time.




Okay. Hey, Conor.




QUESTION: Can I ask one last question on this?




MS NAUERT: Yeah.




QUESTION: President Trump talked about a couple of different verbal agreements between him and Kim Jong-un during their meeting in Singapore. Can you say whether or not a declaration, a joint declaration to end the war, was one of those agreements?




MS NAUERT: I’m not familiar with that being a part of the overall agreement, but I can tell you that we believe that denuclearization has to take place before we get to other parts, and that’s been a part of our policy.




QUESTION: Including a joint declaration?




MS NAUERT: Pardon me?




QUESTION: Including a joint declaration?




MS NAUERT: Yes. Yeah.




Okay, I’ve got to wrap it up, then.




QUESTION: On next week’s 2+2.




MS NAUERT: Hey. Yeah.




QUESTION: So on next week’s 2+2, earlier this summer, over 4 million individuals in Assam were left off the citizenship rolls. There was some controversy, there were fears about deportations. Will Secretary --




MS NAUERT: I’m sorry, they were left off of what?




QUESTION: Citizenship rolls. They were left off lists of citizens.




MS NAUERT: In India?




QUESTION: Mm-hmm.




MS NAUERT: Okay.




QUESTION: And I was wondering if Secretary Pompeo planned to raise that issue or minority rights more generally in his meetings next week.




MS NAUERT: Well, we talk about a whole host of things with other governments. That particular issue I’m not aware of. Doesn’t mean that he’s not aware of it, I’m just simply not aware of that. We are going there, of course, with our Department of Defense counterparts. We’ll be having some breakaway meetings of our own as will our DOD counterparts be having their own meetings. When we have an agenda and a particular list of topics that I can share with you I certainly will, but I’m just not aware of that one in particular.




QUESTION: Thank you.




QUESTION: On North Korea.




MS NAUERT: Okay, last question. Let me just call on somebody who --




QUESTION: Also on North Korea.




MS NAUERT: Hey, there. How are you doing?




QUESTION: Hi. Good, how are you? Just a quick clarification question on North Korea. You had said yesterday from the President’s tweet about there wasn’t quite enough progress on denuclearization. I wondered what you consider to be enough progress for a trip to be justified in the future.




MS NAUERT: If – the last part of the question was what again?




QUESTION: What would be considered enough progress on denuclearization for a trip for Secretary Pompeo and Steve Biegun to be justified to North Korea?




MS NAUERT: So the President said we were not making sufficient progress with respect to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.




QUESTION: So what --




MS NAUERT: That was the President’s position, that’s the Secretary’s position, and that’s the position of the President’s national security team. And so they made the decision to postpone that trip. I think it’s one of those things that we’ll know it when we see it. We stand ready. We’re watching closely. We stand ready to have meetings, and we will wait and see what happens. But I’ll let you know when we have something more for that, okay?




QUESTION: Can I ask you one more question on China?




MS NAUERT: Yeah, and then I got to go.




QUESTION: There was a letter today from a bipartisan group of lawmakers urging the administration to use Global Magnitsky Act to sanction China over the crackdown in western China and Xinjiang province. Do you guys have any response to that? Is that something that you’re considering?




MS NAUERT: I’ve not seen that letter. Sometimes when a letter comes to the State Department, reporters tend to hear about it from members of Congress faster than we do. So I just can’t confirm receipt of that letter just yet, but I’ll take a look and see if we have anything for you on that.




QUESTION: I just want to --




QUESTION: If I could just broadly on – is that something that you would consider, sanctioning China?




MS NAUERT: I’m just not going to comment on that in general terms without having seen the letter, who it’s from, what it includes. It’s certainly something that we would – we would take a look at and consider, however.




QUESTION: I just want to ask (inaudible) letter --




MS NAUERT: Okay. Lesley, go ahead.




QUESTION: -- because it happened last week, but I don’t think we’ve had a chance to raise it, is that’s the letter from Menendez and Shaheen requesting the notes of the interpreter from the Helsinki summit between Trump and --




MS NAUERT: I don’t have any updates for you on that. I know that those interpreters take an oath of privacy, and that’s something that they hold very dear. It’s one of the ethics that they adhere to and agree to when they take on those positions. If I have anything more for you, I’ll let you know.




Okay. Thanks, everybody. And have a good Memorial weekend.




QUESTION: Labor Day.




QUESTION: Labor Day.




MS NAUERT: Labor Day weekend, yes. Thank you.




(The briefing was concluded at 3:18 p.m.)




# # #









The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

View more on U.S. Department of State's website »
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on August 29, 2018 15:17

August 28, 2018

Department Press Briefings : Department Press Briefing - August 28, 2018

Heather Nauert





Spokesperson


Department Press Briefing





Washington, DC





August 28, 2018











Index for Today's Briefing

GREECE



NORTH KOREA



SOUTH KOREA/NORTH KOREA



PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES



SYRIA



BURMA


TRANSCRIPT:







2:53 p.m. EDT










MS NAUERT: All right. Good afternoon, everybody. Great to see you.




I’d like to start with one quick announcement today, and this is a continuation of a story we’ve talked about for quite some time about Greece. And once again, we would like to strongly condemn the release of a convicted terrorist named Dimitris Koufodinas on a five-day reprieve from his imprisonment in Greece. It is his fourth and longest furlough in the past year. Koufodinas is a terrorist who has been convicted of multiple murders, including those of our embassy defense attache William Nordeen, and United States Air Force Sgt. Ronald Stewart. These furloughs are a shameful injustice to his many victims’ families and serve as further incentive for his anarchist followers to commit further violence and destructive acts in his name. Our embassy in Athens has conveyed our serious concerns about this decision to the Greek Government.




Just to put things into perspective, over the past year, he has been granted more than 11 days – actually, 11 days of furlough. We do not believe that a convicted terrorist who has murdered not just our personnel, U.S. personnel, but other – from other governments as well, including innocent civilians in Greece – we do not believe that that kind of person should be given a vacation from prison.




With that, I’d be happy to take your questions. AP usually starts, so – good to see you.




QUESTION: Yes. Good to be here. Thanks for this. I wanted to start off asking about North Korea.




MS NAUERT: Okay.




QUESTION: After the cancellation of Pompeo’s trip, is the diplomatic effort there in trouble? And then I was also wondering if you could give us some further details about why the trip was canceled. There were reports that it was canceled following the receiving of a letter from Kim Yong-chol, and I was just wondering if you could confirm that.




MS NAUERT: Sure. So let me take your second question first. You know we often don’t get into the detail about our private diplomatic conversations, but I can tell you that the President and his national security team, which obviously included Secretary Pompeo – and I want to make this clear, too, that Ambassador Bolton, the national security advisor, was a part of these conversations; there were some inaccurate reports that he was not; he happened to be on the phone on a secure call participating in this conversation as well. The entire national security team discussed this. In their judgment, they made the judgment that now is not the right time to travel. The President agreed with that, and that is when the President made the decision to send out some tweets announcing that decision.




QUESTION: All right. And the diplomatic effort?




MS NAUERT: Yeah. So the diplomatic effort is still ongoing. I know a lot of people are interested in sort of where this stands. The President overall remains very clear-eyed about the challenges and difficulties ahead of us. We have long said, the Secretary has long said, that this wouldn’t be easy from the start, and it would be – could be a somewhat lengthy process. Overall, sometimes we move forward; sometimes we stand right where we are. We look forward to future negotiations when the time is right.




Hey, Lesley.




QUESTION: Has the Secretary spoken to his North Korean counterparts in recent days to explain it? And there’s reporting that this letter was rather – it had a belligerent tone, quite aggressive. Can you confirm any of that? I mean, is that the reason why?




MS NAUERT: I can’t confirm that. The Secretary, the President, the national security team made the decision that now is not the right time to travel.




QUESTION: So have you been in touch with --




MS NAUERT: That’s a good question; I don’t know the answer to that. I can go back and ask that question.




Hi.




QUESTION: I guess the decision to go was announced on Thursday, was taken also with a green light or in accordance to what was decided within the NSC and with the President. So what happened between Thursday and Friday that made them change their mind? Because it was the same people deciding to go, and then decided not to go.




MS NAUERT: And some of these would just fall under – and I know it’s not fun for all of you to not get what you see as a sufficient answer, but some of these are just private diplomatic conversations, and they made the decision that now – then was not the right time to travel.




QUESTION: Just another question.




MS NAUERT: Yeah.




QUESTION: Secretary Mattis this morning said or warned that he wasn’t planning to suspend other drills in the region anymore. But he said I will have to discuss with State Department to see how the negotiations are going and so on. Would you – would the State Department advise Secretary Mattis to keep on suspending the drills, or he can resume them?




MS NAUERT: Well, I think we would hew very closely to what the President and also what the Department of Defense wanted to do. Secretary Pompeo and Secretary Mattis speak a lot about these things; we’re very closely coordinated. Also, part of this is having conversations with the South Koreans and our allies as well. So if we have any changes to that posture, we’ll certainly let you know. But I think DOD did a very fulsome briefing today, so I’d refer you back to some of what they said.




QUESTION: Heather --




QUESTION: Hi, Heather.




MS NAUERT: Hey, Rich.




QUESTION: Have there been any communications between the State Department and North Korea since those tweets came out?




MS NAUERT: That’s a question that Lesley just asked. I don’t have the answer to that, but I’ll see if I can get it for you.




QUESTION: Okay. Thank you. And in the end of the President’s tweet messages canceling this trip from the Secretary, he said he looked forward to seeing Kim Jong-un soon. Prior to this, were there discussions about the potential for another meeting between the two?




MS NAUERT: I don’t have anything for you on that. That would be more of a White House question at this point.




QUESTION: And just making clear, people were asking about the content of the letter. Can you comment on the existence of that letter?




MS NAUERT: I cannot confirm a letter, and I certainly can’t confirm the content of any diplomatic conversations. And when I say conversations, that also encompasses any kind of talks that we would have about those types of things, okay. Hi, Janne.




QUESTION: Hi. Thanks, Heather. Usually on North Korea immediately response about these issues. But this time, they not talking anything or have you heard from any mentions about cancelations or --




MS NAUERT: Have – I’m sorry. Start – have I heard any mentions about --




QUESTION: Yeah. The Secretary’s visit North Korea cancelations, about how did you expect North Korea going to be response about the cancelation? Did you ever contact UN North Korean delegations?




MS NAUERT: Well, we – I mean, we certainly expect the North Korean Government to adhere and to go along with the pledges and promises that they made at the Singapore summit, in accordance to what the agreed to with the President.




I have a statement from the Secretary that he provided me earlier today, which I’d be happy to give to you, his take on the situation there. He says: Despite the decision to delay my trip to Pyongyang, America stands ready to engage when it is clear that Chairman Kim stands ready to deliver on the commitments that he made at the Singapore summit to President Trump to completely denuclearize North Korea. The world is united behind the need for Chairman Kim to fulfill that commitment. Every member of the United Nations Security Council voted to call upon North Korea to abandon all nuclear weapons, existing nuclear programs, and other weapons of mass destruction. The goal of final, fully verified denuclearization of North Korea, as agreed to by Chairman Kim, is the world’s goal. The United States, like the rest of the world, is looking forward to North Korea’s compliance with these resolutions, which will enable Chairman Kim to provide a brighter future for his own people.




And for folks who need a little nighttime reading, those UN Security Council Resolutions 2371, 2375, and 2397 – they lay them out very clearly. So when you hear other governments or other individuals criticizing the United States, that the United States is perhaps upending these negotiations, I would point you back to these unanimous UN Security Council resolutions, which clearly lay out the world’s unanimous expectations of the North Korean Government to denuclearize and all the other things we just mentioned. I can read for you those resolutions if you like.




QUESTION: No thanks. (Laughter.)




MS NAUERT: No? Not today. Okay. Another time. All right.




QUESTION: The letter --




MS NAUERT: Hey, Kylie.




QUESTION: Hi. So you said now is not the time for the trip. Is the State Department and Pompeo still committed to making a trip to North Korea at some point in the near future or potentially never again?




MS NAUERT: I think that’s entirely a hypothetical. We stand ready to talk when the North Koreans stand ready to do so and we think it can be productive.




QUESTION: How else --




QUESTION: And --




QUESTION: How else could it be done that – sorry.




QUESTION: Well, and you also spoke specifically about the President’s tweet, which cited no progress on denuclearization, so --




MS NAUERT: No. Actually, he said we feel that they are not making sufficient progress. There’s a big difference there.




QUESTION: So they are making --




MS NAUERT: We feel that they’re not making sufficient progress. There is progress being made.




QUESTION: On denuclearization?




MS NAUERT: The Secretary is not just hopping on a plane and flying to North Korea for his health. He is going there to have serious, substantive talks. Those talks have, obviously, occurred. Many of you have been on those trips with us. But in the President’s view and in the national security team’s view, sufficient progress with respect to denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula was not being made.




QUESTION: And one last question.




MS NAUERT: Yeah.




QUESTION: Ambassador Sung Kim was also at the White House on Friday. And I’m just curious, why was he here in Washington? Was he here to meet Mr. Biegun? What was the genesis of that trip?




MS NAUERT: I actually can’t confirm that Sung Kim was here, if Ambassador --




QUESTION: There was a photo at the White House.




MS NAUERT: Okay. I did not – I have not seen that picture.




QUESTION: Okay.




MS NAUERT: I don’t know why he was here, other than that he’s an important part of the team and has advised the Secretary and the overall team on the effort regarding North Korea. And in terms of our Special Representative Steve Biegun, we’re thrilled to have him on board.




Okay. Hi, Conor.




QUESTION: Just a couple follow-ups on this.




MS NAUERT: Yeah.




QUESTION: Ambassador Haley said today that it’s possible North Korea has changed its mind on its commitment to denuclearization. Is that a view that the Secretary shares as well?




MS NAUERT: I haven’t asked the Secretary that question. All we know is that Chairman Kim has made certain commitments to the President at the Singapore summit.




QUESTION: And then just one more.




MS NAUERT: Yeah, sure.




QUESTION: A close ally of the Secretary, Senator Marco Rubio, also said today – he tweeted that talks have failed. Just get your reaction to that? Obviously, this is someone that the Secretary is --




MS NAUERT: Yeah, you know I tend not to comment on things that other world leaders or even U.S. politicians would say. I would certainly say that when you look at some of the things that have taken place in the last year: One, we’re in a very different spot today than we were one year ago, where there were ballistic missile launches, where there were nuclear tests. We all remember very well what last summer looked like and the fear that many Americans felt at that time. Today, we are in a very different place.




Two, we are in conversations and have been in negotiations with this government that we have not had any kind of real relationship with for just about a decade. Now, the fact that we’re having conversations, I would call that progress, and I would call that diplomatic progress, and that’s exactly what we do out of this building.




The maximum pressure campaign – the world came together to impose sanctions against North Korea. When we were just at ASEAN, we heard so many of those ASEAN nations thanking the United States and thanking President Trump for his leadership on this issue. Were it not for the UN Security Council resolutions and for the maximum pressure campaign, Chairman Kim would not have gotten to this point where he is willing and open to having conversations with the United States Government.




You recall when President Moon of South Korea first came here, I think it was back in March or perhaps it was early April, and he stood just outside the door of the White House and he thanked this administration for its efforts with that economic pressure campaign.




So those are just a few ways – I can go on and on – about the repatriation of remains, I can remind folks of the three Americans that we brought home just a few months ago. Secretary Pompeo’s – I think it was his tenth day on the job – I would call that tremendous progress and would take issue with anyone who would claim that we have not made progress on this front.




I’ve got to move on to some other issues, and I have to – I have to cut the briefing short today. Yeah.




QUESTION: South Asia?




QUESTION: President Moon is supposed to meet with Kim Jong-un next month in North Korea. Given your past comments saying that – pointing to his comments that there can be no progress on inter-Korean relations without progress on denuclearization, would you call on him to cancel that meeting?




MS NAUERT: No, I think I would just go back to what President Moon has said in the past, that those things have to take place, that has to take place. The denuclearization has to take place. He’s been very clear about that. We continue to have good, frank discussions with our allies, both the Republic of Korea and Japan.




QUESTION: So he shouldn’t cancel until there’s been more progress?




MS NAUERT: Look, I would just go back to what he has said in the past, the importance of denuclearization.




Said, go right ahead.




QUESTION: Thank you.




QUESTION: Has there been any progress on --




QUESTION: Thank you, Heather.




QUESTION: Can you just make it clear if there’s been progress on --




MS NAUERT: I’ve got to move on to other things. I think I just announced that, I discussed that, about denuclearization.




Said.




QUESTION: There’s been progress on denuclearizing or --




MS NAUERT: We are having those conversations. The conversations have continued. As you know, we decided not to take this trip because we felt sufficient progress has not been made. But I think I’ve addressed your question already.




Said, go right ahead.




QUESTION: Thank you, Heather. I wanted to ask you about the – the State Department last Friday informed Congress that – of aid cutoff to the Palestinians in the amount of $200 million. Can you share with us why it was finally decided for this aid to be cut off, considering that this goes directly to help the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza? It doesn’t go through the Authority. It goes – it is implemented by USAID and other American-affiliated NGOs and so on. And it goes to aid the youth and the women. Why was it decided to cut off the aid?




MS NAUERT: Earlier this year, and you all recall this – I know we received a lot of questions about this issue – the President directed an overall review of U.S. assistance to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and also in Gaza to ensure that U.S. taxpayer dollars were being spent in accordance with U.S. national interests and then also providing value to the U.S. taxpayer.




The decision was then made, and we sent out a statement to this effect, that that money at this time is not in the best interests of the U.S. national interest and also at this time does not provide value to the U.S. taxpayer. When we talk about the issue of Gaza, we have long said – bless you – Gaza is the primary entity – excuse me, the Palestinian Authority, the Palestinians and Hamas – the primary reason why the security situation and the situation in Gaza is so terrible, why electricity has become an issue, why clean water has become an issue, all of those things. And Hamas needs to take care of its people. It has refused to do so. Instead, it has spent money on other types of projects, and you know exactly what I’m talking about.




Yeah.




QUESTION: Two quick follow-ups. But in fact, your allies disagree with you. They think that cutting off aid will exacerbate an already volatile – volatile --




MS NAUERT: I am sure they do, and that is because the United States Government --




QUESTION: Including the Israelis, including the Israelis.




MS NAUERT: That is because the United States Government has provided far more money --




QUESTION: I understand.




MS NAUERT: -- than many other countries in the region have. And I think Ambassador Haley spoke to that today --




QUESTION: I understand.




MS NAUERT: -- when she talked about the importance of burden sharing. And that is we believe that the United States alone does not have to shoulder a disproportionate share of financing programs overseas. The United States is the most generous country in the world, and we continue by and large to be the most significant donor to many programs around the world. But we also feel that other countries should step up and take responsibility, and that’s a key point of what the President has discussed.




QUESTION: Okay, I understand. But what is the logic, when you say that it was not in the interest of the national security of the United States of America while, in fact, the Israelis, including Israeli generals and intelligence and so on, the British, the French, everybody says it is actually – it can exacerbate this horrible situation? So why is that not in the interest of the national security of the United States?




MS NAUERT: I think we believe at this time that it is not providing value to the U.S. taxpayer. If I have anything more for you on that, I will let you know.




QUESTION: Right. One last issue on the – there’s been a great deal of talk about that this administration is going to be pushing – sometime soon, maybe next week, maybe the following week – to cut off all aid to UNRWA and in fact, dismantle UNRWA and to have whatever programs UNRWA is doing now to have it conducted under UNHCR. Could you share with us or could you enlighten us on this effort, if there is such an effort, if that is the thinking of this building? Because this building historically has been supportive of UNRWA.




MS NAUERT: Yeah. I can just tell you we have no decisions to announce today. No decisions have been made.




Hi, Laurie.




QUESTION: Hi.




MS NAUERT: I saw you at the Pentagon today.




QUESTION: So I’m following up with an issue that came – was raised at the Pentagon.




MS NAUERT: Okay.




QUESTION: It has to do with Syria’s use of chemical weapons in Idlib, possible use. And specifically, Secretary Mattis said this morning that you were in regular contact with Russia on this issue. Can you explain both your concerns and what the situation is, particularly with the Russians?




MS NAUERT: Mm-hmm. And I think DOD did a terrific job of laying out a lot of the issues there, so I would largely echo what the Department of Defense said and encourage anyone who’s not taken a look at that transcript to please take a look at that.




I can tell you that the Secretary spoke with Foreign Minister Lavrov last week. We made it very clear, the Secretary made it clear, that any Russian regime offensive on Idlib and an escalation --




QUESTION: You mean a Syrian regime offensive?




MS NAUERT: I’m sorry. Yes, thank you. Any Russian and/or Syrian regime offense – offensive on Idlib and any kind of escalation in that area, we would hold them responsible and we would hold them accountable for that, especially – most especially, for the use of chemical weapons. The United States has taken a very strong stance in the past when chemical weapons have been used. You all know that very well.




We have engaged the Russian Government and also the military at the most senior level. Ambassador Bolton has spoken to his Russian counterparts. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Chairman Dunford, has as well spoken with his Russian counterparts to make it very clear that the United States Government and its partners would respond to any verified chemical weapons use in Idlib, or elsewhere in Syria for that matter, in a swift and appropriate manner.




So we would encourage Russia to make this point very clear to Damascus that that will not be tolerated.




QUESTION: Thank you. And a follow-up: The Syrian and Iranian defense ministers just signed a new defense cooperation agreement. How do you view that?




MS NAUERT: Yeah, we saw that, certainly. Iran has continued its destabilizing activities around the globe, and I think would be a primary example of that.




Okay? Okay.




QUESTION: On Idlib very quickly --




QUESTION: South Asia?




QUESTION: Just to follow-up on Idlib, because all reports say that it is – it has a concentration of al-Nusrah forces, the bad guys that you have listed as terrorists and so on. They are concentrated there. Their allies, who are from the same political and kind of militant orientation, are also there. You certainly don’t want to provide another safe haven in Idlib, do you?




MS NAUERT: Said, I don’t have anything additional for you on that, but I think Department of Defense addressed that today earlier. I can tell you something in addition on the Geneva talks. That is something that has been a real priority of ours and a priority of our Special Representative Jim Jeffrey as well, to reinvigorate the Geneva process.




I can tell you that we have accepted an invitation by Staffan de Mistura. He is the UN special envoy handling Syria. We will be participating in talks in Geneva on September 14th. It’s a bit of a ways off, certainly, but I can tell you that Ambassador Jeffrey will be there and looks forward to representing the United States along with our Deputy Assistant Secretary Joel Rayburn.




I want to make it clear that we fully support the Geneva process. We fully support the efforts on the part of Staffan de Mistura to broker a political settlement. We recognize that a military solution is not going to resolve the problem long term in Syria that it has to be a political solution, so I expect that we’ll have more announcements and details for you on the days and weeks to come. But we think we’re at a good spot right now in getting back to the Geneva process.




And I can take one more question.




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




QUESTION: Yeah. Heather.




MS NAUERT: I can take more one question and then I have to go. Hi.




QUESTION: Thank you so much.




MS NAUERT: Where you been?




QUESTION: (Laughter.) I’ve been enjoying the summer.




MS NAUERT: Oh, good for you. Glad to hear it.




QUESTION: Thank you. Good to be back. Do you have any update on the Rohingya report? When should we expect the State Department to release such a report? And I have one follow-up.




MS NAUERT: Sure. So let me first start with the UN fact-finding mission, and UN just released its report within the last day or so. And I just want to make clear that that is something that – we are reviewing that report’s recommendations. So there is that piece of things. The findings in that report, if you’ve not reviewed it just yet, overall add to a growing body of information indicating widespread human rights abuses by the Burmese military and other security forces in Burma. The United States Government has held individuals – high-level military individuals responsible. We have through different rounds of sanctions in the past and I will certainly let you know if we have any additional announcements on that.




There’s a second piece of information and that is the State Department’s own documentation project that – it started – actually, let me back up for one second and mention something about the UN fact-finding mission. We were very troubled by the fact that those participating in the UN fact-finding mission were not granted access to the Rakhine State, and that’s the key area where this crisis has taken place and so many people were run out of their homes and killed, and you know the rest of that. They have not been able to gather adequate information and that has long been a concern of ours. Humanitarian workers have not been able to get in and provide the important and necessary aid and support that they need to. Media, that has been an issue as well. So I just wanted to highlight that disappointment that we have had that various groups have not been able to get in.




With regard to our documentation project, the State Department undertook one in which refugees located at Cox’s Bazar, which is in Bangladesh – many of them were interviewed for their experiences. That has been pulled together into a report which the Secretary will review and has taken a look at it from my understanding, and we will decide whether and to what extent to publicize that final report.




As you well know, we considered this, we designated this as ethnic cleansing last year. It’s a very complicated and complex process that involves a whole lot of lawyers, and when we have something ready to announce, we’ll certainly let you know. Okay?




QUESTION: Do you share the --




QUESTION: (Off-mike.)




MS NAUERT: Yeah. I’ve got to do last question. I’ve got to go.




QUESTION: Can I just follow up on that one (inaudible)?




MS NAUERT: Yeah.




QUESTION: So the – so do you agree or – that – with the UN report that there was genocidal intent in those attacks against the Rohingya?




MS NAUERT: We have not made a determination on that, and I’ll go back to what I just said, and that is it is a very specific legal designation. It’s not one that is easily made. To the average person, of course these things are incredibly horrific and it seems like we should just slap a label on something. Well, there are complex legal designations that have legal meaning and weight in courts around the world. So that is why the Secretary reviews this very carefully and makes the best determination possible.




QUESTION: But does the UN policy affect at all what the U.S. does going forward? Does the UN report in any way change --




MS NAUERT: Does the UN fact-finding mission change --




QUESTION: -- anything to do with how the U.S. policy is?




MS NAUERT: We support that process and we are taking a look at the recommendations. And I’ve got to go unfortunately, but thanks, everybody. We’ll see you real soon.




(The briefing was concluded at 3:18 p.m.)




DPB # 43









The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department.
External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.

View more on U.S. Department of State's website »
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on August 28, 2018 15:16

U.S. Department of State's Blog

U.S. Department of State
U.S. Department of State isn't a Goodreads Author (yet), but they do have a blog, so here are some recent posts imported from their feed.
Follow U.S. Department of State's blog with rss.